Updated State of the Collections

[Arne Siegel]

Another possible way to express the not-null-ness requirement in the current API:

.map(Objects::requireNonNull)


Or, when desiring control of the NPE message:

.map(e -> Objects.requireNonNull(e, "null disallowed in stream"))


Best regards
Arne Siegel



On 16 Nov 2012 at 17:38, Sergey Kuksenko wrote:

> I have to note that suggested null handle example is not a filter. It is 
> an assert and the following explicit methods would be useful:
> 
> Stream<T> assert(Predicate<? super T> predicate);
> 
> and one of (or both):
> 
> Stream<T> assert(Predicate<? super T> predicate, Supplier<Throwable> 
> throwFactory);
>     or
> Stream<T> assert(Predicate<? super T> predicate, Supplier<String> 
> messageFactory);
> 
> 
> Open questions:
> - name of methods (assert is keyword),
> - to do connections with "-ea" option or not?
> 
> 
> On 11/16/2012 02:26 PM, Arne Siegel wrote:
> > Just one observation: the proposed way to handle the "error" strategy for nulls won't compile,
> > as it fails to comply the contract for a Predicate:
> >
> > filter(e -> { (if e == null) throw new NPE(); }
> >
> >
> > I can think of two compilable alternatives:
> >
> > filter(e -> { (if e == null) throw new NPE(); else return true; }
> >
> > tee(e -> { (if e == null) throw new NPE(); }
> >
> >
> >
> > On 15 Nov 2012 at 13:31, Brian Goetz wrote:
> >
> >> is here: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~briangoetz/lambda/sotc3.html
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> -- 
> Best regards,
> Sergey Kuksenko
>