Hi Paul, Paul Benedict wrote:
Since we're talking Map, I think a more utility would be gained by including putIfAbsent (see java.util.concurrent) because I see many lines of code that do that idiom all the time.This idiom is especially prevalent when the value is itself a nested collection. Map<Object, List<Object>> map = ... List<Object> collection = map.get(key); if (collection == null) { collection = new LinkedList<Object>(); map.put(key, collection); } collection.add(value);
I suspect Remi referred to closures to have a way to let the user define what should happen in place of "new LinkedList" above.
The ConcurrentMap.putIfAbsent takes the potentially inserted object as a parameter and you have to take special steps to try to avoid unnecessary contruction (google Memoizer).
My main concern about non-concurrent putIfAbsent is that it is non-concurrent and I would not want users to get the two confused.
Just 2c. David Holmes
