On Wed, 1 Feb 2023 14:36:51 GMT, Nir Lisker <nlis...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> `List.of` is cleaner, and can slightly reduce the memory footprint for lists
>> of one or two elements.
>>
>> Because `List.of` can only store non-null elements, I have only replaced a
>> few usage.
>>
>> Can someone open an Issue on JBS for me?
>
> modules/javafx.media/src/main/java/com/sun/media/jfxmedia/Media.java line 103:
>
>> 101: }
>> 102: }
>> 103: return returnValue;
>
> This method can be reduced to
>
> public List<Track> getTracks() {
> synchronized (tracks) {
> return tracks.isEmpty() ? null : List.copyOf(tracks);
> }
> }
>
> though I find it highly questionable that it returns `null` for an empty list
> instead of just an empty list. There are 2 use cases of this method and both
> would do better with just an empty list.
Yeah, I noticed this as well right away, it is documented to do this though.
The documentation however does seem to suggest it might be possible that there
are three results:
1. Tracks haven't been scanned yet -> `null`
2. Tracks have been scanned, but none where found -> empty list
3. Tracks have been scanned and some were found -> list
Whether case 2 can ever happen is unclear, but distinguishing it from the case
where nothing has been scanned yet with `null` does not seem unreasonable.
-------------
PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jfx/pull/1012
