On Apr 9, 2020, at 1:58 PM, Remi Forax <fo...@univ-mlv.fr> wrote: > > I don't fully understand why not using checkcast because from the user POV > the message will be better than just NPE.
When today I try unbox an Integer but encounter a null, my experience is “NPE” rather than a more informative “failed to unbox this int because you handed me a null”. I agree, generally speaking, that messages should be more informative. But surely the bar is low here, and “NPE” is not out of bounds? That said, an indy-based solution has full information about the use site, and can be coaxed to generate whatever user experience we desire. And so would intrinsic based solutions, of which I am favorable to some but not all. Perhaps we want another (intrinsically optimized) version of Objects::requireNonNull, which takes a second argument that assists in generating a better diagnostic. — John
