[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SLING-8706?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16974278#comment-16974278
]
Stefan Seifert commented on SLING-8706:
---------------------------------------
there is an stackoverflow article about "Why java.util.Optional is not
Serializable" with an answer
https://stackoverflow.com/a/24564612
"... the primary design goal for Optional is to be used as the return value of
functions when a return value might be absent. ... It was never intended for
Optional to be used other ways, such as for optional method arguments or to be
stored as a field in an object. And by extension, making Optional serializable
would enable it to be stored persistently or transmitted across a network, both
of which encourage uses far beyond its original design goal."
so the pattern above would somewhat contradict this design goal, although i
like the approach as well.
> Injections for java.util.Optional<> should be automatic optional
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: SLING-8706
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SLING-8706
> Project: Sling
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Sling Models
> Reporter: Jörg Hoh
> Priority: Major
>
> The current approach to support optional injections requires to annotate the
> field with {{@Optional}} plus proper handling within the javacode (null
> checks etc), which can be forgotten.
> So instead of
> {code}
> @Inject @Optional
> String fieldname;
> {code}
> it should also be possible to use this
> {code}
> @Inject
> Optional<String> fieldname;
> {code}
> with the very same semantic. But the developer is forced to deal with the
> case that the value is not present.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
