> On Mar 7, 2019, at 4:52 PM, Kevin Bourrillion <kev...@google.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 7, 2019 at 12:47 PM Brian Goetz <brian.go...@oracle.com > <mailto:brian.go...@oracle.com>> wrote: > > Normalization can happen on single arguments or multiple: > > record Person(String name) { > public Person { > name = name.toUpperCase(); > } > } > > (Note that I’m mutating the parameter, which will then get written to the > field.) > > I'm a bit relieved to hear this. The document seemed to imply that you would > assign to the field, then later the remaining fields that weren't DA would be > set from the remaining parameters. I think parameter reassignment is superior > because there are never two versions of the data in scope at the same time. > (I think the argument against parameter reassignment is mainly that it's > heresy.)
I see no heresy in assigning to a non-final variable. On the other hand, I’m a great believer in adding `final` to my method parameters, at least when there might be any doubt. Anyone who complains that “Duh, parameters should *always* be final, why isn’t that the default?” will find me replying “Duh, local variables should *almost always* be final, why isn’t that the default?” :-) —Guy
