Tim Ruppert wrote:
> Instance of is a bad practice to get into in object oriented code -
> might as well just go back to C and switch statements.
==
String foo = (String) context.get("foo");
if (UtilValidate.isEmpty(foo)) {
}
Object bar = context.get("bar");
Map barMap;
if (UtilValidate.isEmpty(bar)) {
return;
} else if (bar instanceof String) {
barMap = parseStringAsJSONMap((String) bar);
} else if (bar instanceof Collection) {
barMap = convertCollectionToMap((Collection) bar);
} else if (bar instanceof Map) {
barMap = (Map) bar;
} else {
throw new IllegalArgumentException("Can't handle bar");
}
==
The first isEmpty call calls isEmpty(String). The latter calls
isEmpty(Object). The latter method then needs to do the instanceof
itself. But I assume you understand that.
Besides, you are deep into the 'instanceof always considered bad
camp'. This is wrong. See
http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/t302491-instanceof-not-always-bad-the-instanceof-myth.html
>
> Cheers,
> Ruppert
>
> On Nov 24, 2009, at 8:45 AM, Adam Heath wrote:
>
>> Adrian Crum wrote:
>>> Or better yet, overload the method so you don't need all those
>>> conditionals.
>>
>> If the type of the object in the calling method is Object, then it
>> won't call the overloaded method.
>>
>> However, this is better:
>>
>> if (object instanceof String) {
>> return UtilValidate.isEmpty((String) object);
>> }
>
