[gwt-contrib] Re: Make UriUtils#unsafeCastFromUntrustedString gracefully handle null for (issue1443814)
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 1:32 AM, Christoph Kern x...@google.com wrote: It turns out it was easier to fix the specific case this broke in client code (a test that ended up passing null for a URL). Which raises the question, should Image gracefully handle null for URLs, or should the API docs clarify that non-null values are expected? Is there a convention for handling nulls in the GWT API? SafeHtmlUtils at least doesn't handle 'null' (and will throw NPEs). I'd rather have SafeUri follow the same pattern, whether it is to throw NPEs or is changed as proposed here for unsafeCastFromUntrustedString. -- http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
[gwt-contrib] Re: Make UriUtils#unsafeCastFromUntrustedString gracefully handle null for (issue1443814)
In general we try to be null-intolerant, although I don't know how consistent we are about it. Basically, nulls should never be quietly cleaned up for you but rather should fail fast if practical. If null is a legal value, it should serve a specific purpose. On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 12:44 AM, Thomas Broyer t.bro...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 1:32 AM, Christoph Kern x...@google.com wrote: It turns out it was easier to fix the specific case this broke in client code (a test that ended up passing null for a URL). Which raises the question, should Image gracefully handle null for URLs, or should the API docs clarify that non-null values are expected? Is there a convention for handling nulls in the GWT API? SafeHtmlUtils at least doesn't handle 'null' (and will throw NPEs). I'd rather have SafeUri follow the same pattern, whether it is to throw NPEs or is changed as proposed here for unsafeCastFromUntrustedString. -- http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
[gwt-contrib] Re: Make UriUtils#unsafeCastFromUntrustedString gracefully handle null for (issue1443814)
Although in this specific case, the method in question is deprecated and only there for legacy support. I think its okay to do the null check in that case if needed. On 2011/06/07 16:00:48, rjrjr wrote: In general we try to be null-intolerant, although I don't know how consistent we are about it. Basically, nulls should never be quietly cleaned up for you but rather should fail fast if practical. If null is a legal value, it should serve a specific purpose. On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 12:44 AM, Thomas Broyer mailto:t.bro...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 1:32 AM, Christoph Kern mailto:x...@google.com wrote: It turns out it was easier to fix the specific case this broke in client code (a test that ended up passing null for a URL). Which raises the question, should Image gracefully handle null for URLs, or should the API docs clarify that non-null values are expected? Is there a convention for handling nulls in the GWT API? SafeHtmlUtils at least doesn't handle 'null' (and will throw NPEs). I'd rather have SafeUri follow the same pattern, whether it is to throw NPEs or is changed as proposed here for unsafeCastFromUntrustedString. http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1443814/ -- http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
[gwt-contrib] Re: Make UriUtils#unsafeCastFromUntrustedString gracefully handle null for (issue1443814)
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 09:19, jlaba...@google.com wrote: Although in this specific case, the method in question is deprecated and only there for legacy support. I think its okay to do the null check in that case if needed. There were only a few callers that failed due to passing in nulls for the URL. I think I'll go with rjrjr's guidance and will drop this change. On 2011/06/07 16:00:48, rjrjr wrote: In general we try to be null-intolerant, although I don't know how consistent we are about it. Basically, nulls should never be quietly cleaned up for you but rather should fail fast if practical. If null is a legal value, it should serve a specific purpose. On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 12:44 AM, Thomas Broyer mailto:t.bro...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 1:32 AM, Christoph Kern mailto:x...@google.com wrote: It turns out it was easier to fix the specific case this broke in client code (a test that ended up passing null for a URL). Which raises the question, should Image gracefully handle null for URLs, or should the API docs clarify that non-null values are expected? Is there a convention for handling nulls in the GWT API? SafeHtmlUtils at least doesn't handle 'null' (and will throw NPEs). I'd rather have SafeUri follow the same pattern, whether it is to throw NPEs or is changed as proposed here for unsafeCastFromUntrustedString. http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1443814/ -- http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
[gwt-contrib] Re: Make UriUtils#unsafeCastFromUntrustedString gracefully handle null for (issue1443814)
lgtm http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1443814/ -- http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
[gwt-contrib] Re: Make UriUtils#unsafeCastFromUntrustedString gracefully handle null for (issue1443814)
It turns out it was easier to fix the specific case this broke in client code (a test that ended up passing null for a URL). Which raises the question, should Image gracefully handle null for URLs, or should the API docs clarify that non-null values are expected? Is there a convention for handling nulls in the GWT API? Thanks, --xtof On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 15:39, rj...@google.com wrote: lgtm http://gwt-code-reviews.**appspot.com/1443814/http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1443814/ -- http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
