I get that ifPresent is already available; I'm curious if you examined how
often there is actually an "if absent" case in practice, relative to the
"only do something if present" case.
If you don't have statistics, I could fairly easily get statistics on
Google's codebase for what usages of Guava's Optional look like, in terms
of how often
if (optional.isPresent()) {
...
} else {
...
}
occurs, relative to
if (optional.isPresent()) {
...
}
// no else
On Thu Feb 12 2015 at 10:15:45 AM Paul Sandoz <paul.san...@oracle.com>
wrote:
>
> On Feb 12, 2015, at 7:00 PM, Louis Wasserman <lowas...@google.com> wrote:
>
> > How often does the case when you "have a lambda handy already" come up
> in practice? If this leads to people using this method instead of
> ifPresent, that seems wasteful.
> >
>
> A lambda bearing ifPresent is already "present" (sorry!) :-) this is just
> filling it out to be consistent for a terminal operation with an empty
> action.
>
>
> > Guava's Optional succeeded as much for what it left out as what it had
> in -- I confess this makes me nervous that j.u.Optional is becoming a
> kitchen sink.
> >
>
> Yes, i most definitely share this concern. I have already closed a few
> optional issues as will not fix. FWIW I don't plan on adding any more stuff.
>
> Paul.
>
