On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 4:43 AM, Henri Yandell <flame...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Is the following worth keeping in Lang?
>
> public Foo someJdkMethod(Object input) {
> if(input == null) {
> handleAccordingly();
> }
> return input.jdkMethod();
> }
>
> I feel that we've bloated up with these methods, and is it really
> worth it? I still have lots of if(x != null && x.callFoo()) type
> invocations, having a small handful of methods available in Lang to
> let me say if(FooUtils.callFoo(x)) isn't enough to hide all of the
> other times when I might have to worry about it.
>
> Personally I'd like to see these methods removed from Lang [especially
> given Stephen's blogging about null protected setting in some future
> JVM].
>
> An example:
>
> public static String trim(String str) {
> return str == null ? null : str.trim();
> }
>
> Given that I'm likely to do N things to the string, chances are I'll
> check for null up front and then invoke methods rather than repeatedly
> writing ugly code by using StringUtils.
>
> Any thoughts in favour of these methods?
What do bug catchers such as FindBugs do with situations like these?
Would they still report it as a potential bug? Or, do they dig into
the FooUtils.callFoo() methods to see if they're doing the null check?
I'm just curious, I guess. If FindBugs is still going to report it
as a potential bug, then it would seem like folks would probably be
doing the null check on their own to quiet down FindBugs (not that
everyone uses it of course).
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
