Optional require(s) NonNull

Remi Forax forax at univ-mlv.fr
Wed Oct 31 03:52:50 PDT 2012

On 10/31/2012 01:50 AM, Brian Goetz wrote:


> This particular example is a fine one; the set of people who are familiar with Optional in languages other than Java is probably smaller than a few percent of the Java developer base.   Claiming that this vocal minority speaks for "something the larger community wants to change" is ludicrous.  This is something a small but highly vocal fraction wants to change.  And, we did spend a great deal more time on this issue than we had budgeted for, simply because there was a vocal request from the community to consider an alternate viewpoint, which we did.  But in the end, it is our job to separate the interests of the vocal minorities / self-proclaimed elite from the interests of the greater community as a whole.

me still thinking that Optional should not be named Option/Optional 
because people already have a strong opinion of the semantics of 
something named Optional, I fall in the same trap the first time I've 
seen Optional in the stream API, and here, as Brian says, we don't want 
that semantics. We attach meaning to class name without even reading the 
docs, we all do that, so because the concept is different, I think it's 
better to come with a different name.



More information about the lambda-dev mailing list