On Tue, 12 Mar 2024 10:12:18 GMT, Viktor Klang <vkl...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> Chen Liang has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a >> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 13 commits: >> >> - Use the improved form in forEach >> - Merge branch 'master' of https://github.com/openjdk/jdk into >> feature/imm-coll-stream >> - Null checks should probably be in the beginning... >> - mark implicit null checks >> - Merge branch 'master' of https://github.com/openjdk/jdk into >> feature/imm-coll-stream >> - Copyright year, revert changes for non-few element collections >> - Merge branch 'master' of https://github.com/openjdk/jdk into >> feature/imm-coll-stream >> - Merge branch 'feature/imm-coll-stream' of >> https://github.com/liachmodded/jdk into feature/imm-coll-stream >> - Spliterator for 12, iterate/forEach benchmark >> - fix comments >> - ... and 3 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/d5b95a0e...69bd0e9c > > src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/ImmutableCollections.java line 926: > >> 924: if (!REVERSE && e1 != EMPTY) { >> 925: action.accept((E) e1); >> 926: } > > I'm curious to know how the following alternative would fare: > > Suggestion: > > if (e1 != EMPTY) { > action.accept(REVERSE ? (E)e1 : (E)e0); // implicit null check > action.accept(REVERSE ? (E)e0 : (E)e1); > } else { > action.accept(e0); // Implicit null check > } @viktorklang-ora I've updated this piece of code, does it look better now? ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15834#discussion_r1534539452
