What methods should go into a java.util.Objects class in JDK 7?

[Marek Kozieł]

2009/11/16 Stephen Colebourne <scolebourne at joda.org>:
> 2009/11/16 David Holmes - Sun Microsystems <David.Holmes at sun.com>:
>>> In this specific case, the question was "why include it when you can
>>> use a?b:c". Well, I've seen resistance by developers to that language
>>> feature, and I know some places outright block it in coding standards.
>>> For many, a method call is preferred, and "overhead" isn't what
>>> matters.
>>
>> I find such a mentality to programming to be utterly incomprehensible. Who
>> are these people? And what motivates them?
>>
>> I say let these people define their own libraries to support their
>> pathologies - don't lumber it on the rest of the general population of
>> programmers.
>
> This is where things can get very heated, so please take this as just
> my take on what I see.
>
> The community that defines Java - Sun, Google, Open Source, Bloggers -
> are, in general, the experts and gurus in the field. Most people
> reading this list have no problem with the ternary statement. Most of
> us realise that null avoidance is better than null-handling. However,
> we are, by far, the *minority* of Java developers, not the majority.
>
> My call is not to let the majority rule, but to understand that the
> quality code and standards of Sun/Google/SiliconValley are far, far
> rarer everywhere else. Sometimes as leaders it is necessary to accept
> that not everyone is going to do things the 'right' way, and sometimes
> it is better to help mitigate the 'wrong' way (hence Elvis and
> friends). In other words, what do you do when telling people to do the
> right thing fails?
>
> As I say, this is as much about opinion and what you have experienced
> as hard facts. For example, I know that nulls and null-handling is
> everywhere in the codebase I work on, and I don't consider that to be
> especially wrong or broken, nor do my colleagues.
>
> BTW, for the future I'd remind everyone of Fan - http://fandev.org -
> where all variable references are non-null by default, something which
> we should all support.
>
> Stephen
>

I agree with Stephen.

In real word you have to deal with "pathologies" which are made by others.
When you deal with muck you need pitchfork not a white gloves.

I discuses a lot about Elvis null-safe operator and conclusion was always same:
Java without it is better, but there is a lot of cases when we need it
to deal with crappy code.

-- 
Regards.
Lasu aka Marek Kozieł