On 7/9/18 12:59 PM, Per Liden wrote:
On 2018-07-09 20:49, mandy chung wrote:
On 7/9/18 11:31 AM, Zheka Kozlov wrote:
It is possible to create a WeakReference/SoftReference/PhantomReference
with a null value in which case the Reference will never be enqueued.
This
is quite obvious (since null cannot be weakly/softly/phantom reachable).
But I think it's worth being mentioned in the JavaDoc. What do you
think?
Alternatively, the constructor should require non-null referent and
throws NPE if null.
I created https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8206933 to track this.
It's not completely obvious to me that throwing NPE or otherwise
blocking this is the right thing to do. Sure, creating a Reference with
a null referent seems pretty useless, but it's also very similar to
creating a Reference and immediately calling its clear() method, which
is perfectly valid (and equally useless).
Are you saying we should block this because we can easily detect this
particular case/misuse, as opposed to the immediately-called-clear case?
Or is there some other rationale?
I don't expect any one wants to create a reference with null referent
Throwing NPE would be one way to catch if a reference object is created
with null referent. I think the compatibility risk is low.
I agree that Reference::clear is equally useless. Are you thinking
something should be done with Reference::clear?
Mandy
