On 04/28/2014 07:57 AM, David Holmes wrote: > On 28/04/2014 1:05 PM, Otávio Gonçalves de Santana wrote: >> In my opinion not, because Objects.requireNonNull is more readable than >> just string.toString. This way is more understandable which field is >> required and doesn't impact on performance. > > An invocation of requireNonNull is potentially more expensive than the > implicit null check that happens with foo.toString().
It's also potentially cheaper: a cbnz versus a fetch from memory with a few cycles pipeline delay. Andrew.
