Matthew speaks truth here, but if the proposed changes are made StringUtils (2.0) will no longer suit my needs.
Years before StringUtils I had my own StringUtil with isEmpty() and isNotEmpty(), which performed a trim(). So I've long had the need to treat " " == null (to paraphrase Howard). I think this was necessary for web applications, so I understand how this doesn't suit everyone. Lance --- "Hope, Matthew" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > interesting problem... > > "empty string" has a very clear meaning in java, it is a non null > String object of zero length. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Henning P. Schmiedehausen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: 18 July 2003 13:32 > > > > "Howard M. Lewis Ship" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > >I must have missed this. What change to > > StringUtils.isEmpty() are you making. I like it just the > > >way it it ... I had an identical method in Tapestry that I > > deprecated and pointed at StringUtils. > > >I'm very much reliant on "" == null. > > > > I strongly agree here! We replaced lots and lots of > > > > if ((foo == null) || foo.equals("")) with StringUtils.isEmpty() > > > > if ((foo != null) && !foo.equals("")) with StringUtils.isNotEmpty() > > > > in Turbine. If you change this behaviour, we would get _very_ > > upset... :-) > > > > Regards > > Henning __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! http://sbc.yahoo.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
