Rémi Forax said the following on 01/14/11 08:31:
I think I prefer throwIfNull() which is explicit.
+1
As to what gets thrown, none of these suggestions make that obvious from
their name so I would not be concerned about that. Every Java programmer
is very early introduced to NullPointerException.
David Holmes
Rémi
On 1/13/2011 4:12 PM, Tom Hawtin wrote:
On 13/01/2011 20:06, Brian Goetz wrote:
Most of the other methods in this class are of the form "do the right
thing if the object is null (or an array)", but this one is "throw an
exception if the object is null." The intent is clear -- it is for
simplifying fail-fast behavior by checking for nullity early -- but the
name is wrong. This is bad for two reasons: (a) it is confusing and (b)
it forecloses on using the name nonNull() for what most people
expect it
to do -- which is provide a reasonable default.
I think this is completely the wrong way around. On encountering a null
the right thing is to throw an NPE. Don't make Sir C.A.R. Hoare's
billion-dollar mistake worse.
Perhaps the carpet-sweeping methods should be renamed, or put into an
appropriately named class.
Tom
