[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GROOVY-10099?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17348592#comment-17348592
]
Rachel Greenham commented on GROOVY-10099:
------------------------------------------
I'll go at it at the weekend.
I was wondering if part of the original confusion/debate was because in groovy
Object[] and Object... are treated interchangeably, based simply on whether the
last parameter's type is an array type, whereas that's not the case in Java.
Therefore, in the immediate aftermath of Java getting varargs, GROOVY_1026
maybe was an attempt at keeping things behaving as they did before, for
Object[] methods.
I don't think we can tell if a Groovy method was declared with Object..., as
its Method::isVarArgs just returns true either way, but Java does let one
distinguish. If we need to reduce the footprint of the change it might be to
restrict it to calling Java classes' (does not implement GroovyObject) methods
where isVarArgs() returns true, cache that in CachedMethod because it's those
java methods that tend to assume they'll never receive null. But I expect the
first preference would be to have a simpler change that is consistent
everywhere. If it doesn't tear the world down around our ears!
> A single null argument to a varargs parameter is received as null
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: GROOVY-10099
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GROOVY-10099
> Project: Groovy
> Issue Type: Bug
> Environment: Observed on Groovy 3.0.8 on macOS Big Sur (Intel), but I
> don't think that's relevant; it'll be everywhere.
> Reporter: Rachel Greenham
> Priority: Major
> Fix For: 4.x
>
> Attachments: VarArgsTest.groovy, VarArgsTest.jsh
>
>
> (NB: I would set the priority to P2 default to be triaged, but I seem not to
> have that option, so I left it at the default I was presented with.)
> When calling a method with a varargs parameter with a single value, that
> value is wrapped into an array of length 1. This is the behaviour in Java,
> and is the expected behaviour, and _most_ of the time is the behaviour in
> Groovy too.
> But when that single value is null, Groovy will instead just pass the null
> into the method. Java will not do this: You'll get an array with a single
> null in it. Because Groovy's behaviour is unexpected, especially when
> interfacing with Java code, NullPointerExceptions can often ensue.
> Adding to the inconsistencies, if the Groovy code calling the method is in a
> {{@CompileStatic}} context, it behaves just like Java, and the method
> (whether or not _it_ is statically compiled or a dynamic Groovy method)
> receives an array with a null in it.
> So the behaviour in Groovy is inconsistent, both with itself in a
> {{@CompileStatic}} situation, and with Java, and is requiring workarounds in
> Java code to handle this normally-impossible eventuality. (Even if no varargs
> parameter is given you get an empty array, as in fact you do in Groovy too.)
> This may be an "early instalment weirdness": There's an ancient ticket, from
> not long after varargs were introduced into Java, which appears to have
> argued - successfully at the time - that the normal behaviour is a bug:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GROOVY-1026
> Further adding to the confusion may be that Groovy usually elides the
> difference between an {{Object[]}} parameter and an {{Object...}} parameter:
> They both behave the same.
> The offending code appears to be in
> org.codehaus.groovy.reflection.ParameterTypes.java in method fitToVars, lines
> 200-215 in master at the time of writing, which even includes a comment that
> "if the last argument is null, then we don't have to do anything", with which
> I respectfully disagree. :) That behaviour should be to return an array with
> a single null in it (Handily, MetaClassHelper.ARRAY_WITH_NULL saves having to
> make a new one.)
> In principle it's an easy fix (although I've left tagging to others as this
> is my first issue here), but there'd be an obvious nervousness about changing
> behaviour like this when there might be a lot of old code out there depending
> on it behaving the way it does now. OTOH the way it behaves now is breaking
> the expectations of those of us coming to Groovy from a lifetime of Java...
> Attachments:
> VarArgsTest.groovy - a script saved from, and runnable in, groovyConsole,
> demonstrating the behaviour. The behaviour is the same regardless of whether
> the console is launched with the -indy option. (The issue was initially
> observed in indy.) The dynamic portion of the test, when run, ends in a
> NullPointerException as Arrays.asList is not expecting a null varargs
> parameter. Output seen (-indy or not):
>
> {code:java}
> name: the static name 1
> params is null? false
> params length is 1
> [blah]
> name: the static name 2
> params is null? false
> params length is 2
> [blah, blue]
> name: the static name 3 with blah=null
> params is null? false
> params length is 1
> [null]
> Arrays.asList(blah)? [null]
> name: the dynamic name 1
> params is null? false
> params length is 1
> [blah]
> name: the dynamic name 2
> params is null? false
> params length is 2
> [blah, blue]
> name: the dynamic name 3 with blah=null
> params is null? true
> Exception thrown
> java.lang.NullPointerException
> ...{code}
> (etc. stack trace not shown for formatting reasons.)
> VarArgsTest.jsh - a jshell script demonstrating Java's behaviour, very
> similar to the groovy test, but omitting the dynamic portion of the test for
> obvious reasons. (The statements in the Groovy script ending in semicolons
> are left that way precisely to mark that they're identical to the Java test.)
> Runnable with
>
> {code:java}
> jshell PRINTING VarArgsTest.jsh
> {code}
> Output seen:
> {code:java}
> name: the static name 1
> params is null? false
> params length is 1
> [blah]
> name: the static name 2
> params is null? false
> params length is 2
> [blah, blue]
> name: the static name 3 with blah=null
> params is null? false
> params length is 1
> [null]
> Arrays.asList(blah)? [null]
> {code}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
