Comment by hn_throwaway_99 | Hacker News Reader

Comment by hn_throwaway_99 | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

hn_throwaway_99

This is slightly random, but I couldn't help but "laugh in Java" when the very first feature shown, `Objects.requireNonNullElse`, is given with an example and text that states "This method helps streamline handling null values, removing the need for verbose null checks ." Except the version that uses `Objects.requireNonNullElse` is longer than the one that uses the ternary operator!

What is it with Java deciding "Why use 2 characters when 40 will do?" Is it to much to ask for a ?? or ?: operator?

Ah, but the ternary operator solution requires repeating the name of the variable twice. And obviously, since you're writing in Java, your variable name will be at least 50 characters long. Thus making `Objects.requireNonNullElse` shorter.

The null coalescing operator (??) works well for this

Exactly, which is why it's baffling that Java doesn't have it.

It's not only about the length of the method. Ternary operators may look simple enough, but they could lead to some subtle errors. For example, try to guess what's wrong with this code:

  List<String> trimAndAdd(List<String> input, String newItem) {
    List<String> result = new ArrayList<>(input.size() + newItem == null ? 0 : 1);
  ...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com