JDK 8 code review request for 8011800: Add java.util.Objects.requireNonNull(T, Supplier<String>)
Joe Darcy
joe.darcy at oracle.com
Wed Apr 10 20:58:10 UTC 2013
Hello,
On 04/10/2013 05:01 AM, Alan Bateman wrote:
> On 09/04/2013 22:12, Joe Darcy wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> Please review my changes for
>>
>> 8011800: Add java.util.Objects.requireNonNull(T, Supplier<String>)
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~darcy/8011800.0/
>>
>> which add a new method to java.util.Objects to take a
>> Supplier<String> rather than a String.
>>
>> Patch inline below.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> -Joe
>>
> A typo in the javadoc "this methods allows" -> "this method allows".
>
> A subjective comment, but I would drop the word "sibling" from the
> statement.
>
> A minor nit with the @param spilling over into a second line is that
> it might be clearer to indent it so that it's clear where the next tag
> starts. I see the existing requiresNonNull are inconsistent on this
> point.
>
> The uninteresting Supplier is null case isn't specified, perhaps this
> is deliberate?
That is deliberate. Instead of a body like
if (obj == null)
throw new NullPointerException(messageSupplier.get());
return obj;
I briefly considered something more elaborate like
if (obj == null)
throw new
NullPointerException(requireNonNull(messageSupplier.get(), "snarky
comment"));
return obj;
but I figured if you pass in a null message supplier, you get what you
deserve and it wasn't worth the extra cost of bloating the method body
and interfering with inlining.
>
> A typo in the test at line 208, "rvariant" -> "variant".
>
> Also the printed message at line 226 when you get don't pantaloons
> should say "Supplier" rather than "2-arg".
>
I've reworded the specification:
/**
* Checks that the specified object reference is not {@code null} and
* throws a customized {@link NullPointerException} if it is.
*
* <p>Unlike the method {@link requireNonNull(Object, String},
* this method allows creation of the message to be deferred until
* after the null check is made. While this may confer a
* performance advantage in the non-null case, when deciding to
* call this method care should be taken that the costs of
* creating the message supplier are less than the cost of just
* creating the string message directly.
*
* @param obj the object reference to check for nullity
* @param messageSupplier supplier of the detail message to be
* used in the event that a {@code NullPointerException} is thrown
* @param <T> the type of the reference
* @return {@code obj} if not {@code null}
* @throws NullPointerException if {@code obj} is {@code null}
* @since 1.8
*/
and cleaned up the regression tests to use lambda expressions. New
webrev at
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~darcy/8011800.1/
Thanks,
-Joe
More information about the core-libs-dev
mailing list