Paul,
No it is not rhetorical. Most of the one-liners (and I don't necessarily
agree with them either) at least have some perceived convenience value.
In this case I see no value add at all. In fact unless you count on
inlining then this adds pure overhead with the method call.
David
Paul Benedict said the following on 11/16/09 00:01:
David,
I think your question is mostly rhetorical. Most of the code in this
class are one-liners. If you can answer it for this method, you have
answered it for all.
I also think it's a common idiom... and so are the other small stuff in here.
Paul
On Sat, Nov 14, 2009 at 10:46 PM, David Holmes - Sun Microsystems
<david.hol...@sun.com> wrote:
Paul,
Paul Benedict said the following on 11/15/09 11:28:
I would like to propose adding this method:
/**
* Selects the object if not {...@code null}; otherwise fallsback to the
* specified default object.
*
* @param object the object to test
* @param defaultObject the default object
* @return the object if not {...@code null}; otherwise the default object
*/
public static Object defaultIfNull(Object object, Object defaultObject) {
return (object != null) ? object : defaultObject;
}
I don't get it. Why would anyone need the above when they can write:
obj != null ? obj : otherObj
themselves ??? Compared to
defaultIfNull(obj, otherObj)
you don't even save any keystrokes (and this is with a static import)!
David Holmes
