zhong.j.yu at gmail.com
Fri Sep 21 09:05:45 PDT 2012
On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 11:02 AM, Vitaly Davidovich <vitalyd at gmail.com> wrote:
> They're complementary, one doesn't replace the other. If I'm looking at a
> diff of a change outside of IDE, I'd like to have more context. I also may
> not want to pollute my code with @Nullable all over the place.
We will see the pollution of Optional all over the place. There will
be best practice polices scolding people into using it all over the
> Sent from my phone
> On Sep 21, 2012 11:55 AM, "Remi Forax" <forax at univ-mlv.fr> wrote:
>> On 09/21/2012 05:46 PM, Vitaly Davidovich wrote:
>> > The main benefit of Optional, to me, is that it clearly tells the caller
>> > receiver that this thing may be null; the conventional way is to document
>> > pre/post conditions, but developers are notorious for not reading docs.
>> > Returning/taking Optional is "in your face" - the fluent API is a
>> > convenience/benefit.
>> Any decent IDEs (at least Eclipse and IDEA) understand @NonNull/@Nullable
>> and can be easily configured to not compile if you try to call a method on
>> something that is @Nullable.
>> Are you suggesting that Optional is a runtime solution to a static
>> analysis problem ?
>> > Sent from my phone
>> > On Sep 21, 2012 11:42 AM, "Zhong Yu" <zhong.j.yu at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> aren't all reference types in Java "optional" already? If "fluent" API
>> >> is desired, is it possible to add methods to the null type?
>> >> Zhong
More information about the lambda-dev