https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49873
--- Comment #5 from Yegor Kozlov <[email protected]> 2010-09-06 06:44:29 EDT --- (In reply to comment #4) > I do not know if it is allowed to comment on resolved issues (if not, please > excuse my ignorance), but I would like to point out that while I understand > that you want both implementations to work the same, I think it would be > easier > to return a blank cell in the following situation: > > CellValue cellValue = evaluator.evaluate(cell); > switch(cellValue.getCellType()) { > ... > } > > This will throw a nullpointer exception if evaluator returns "null" for blank > cells. It is of course entirely feasible to check for "== null" before doing > the switch, but isn't that partly the point of having a "CELL_TYPE_BLANK"? what you suggest makes sense, but current code exists for a long time and used in many production systems. Changing the returned value from null to CellValue.BLANK may cause incompatibility issues. This is the main reason why I had to reject it. Yegor -- Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
