[email protected] wrote: > 1009: if ( (filterExpression.getOperand() == null > > && filterExpression.getOperand().getOperand() == null > && !exists) > > .... > > > > Is this some kind of null pointer exceptions generator, hard to tell > what should be there, but if I use filter to test existing feature, does > not work.
Thanks for making me laugh :-) I would think that when filterExpression.getOperand() != null, then filterExpression.getOperand().getOperand() is also not null. So it seems to me that the second check above, the NPE generator, is redundant and should be removed. Alternatively, one could parens around the null checks and change the && to an || I guess. Can anybody confirm or provide alternative interpretation? --Thilo > > > > Thanks. > > > > > >
