I like the blank version as it is more expressive. Does this version isBlank trim?
Gary -----Original Message----- From: Stephen Colebourne [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, July 19, 2003 13:13 To: Jakarta Commons Developers List Subject: Re: [lang] Proposal (2): isEmpty From: "Henri Yandell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > It isn't. My preference is now for > > > > isEmpty() - "" or null > > isBlank() - whitespace only, "" or null > > Could just tell people to do isWhitespace && isEmpty ? :) I feel isBlank() is more expressive than isWhitespace(). It just feels more inclusive of null and empty. if (isNotBlank()) { ...process data } OR if (isNotWhitespace()) { ...process data } Then again isWhitespace follows our naming definitions. --- > > isEmptyTrimmed() - trim() then "" or null > > I'm not sure there's any need for this. I wonder how much of the chars > less than 32 count as whitespace? But it seems that isWhitespace is for > most people's usage a superset of isEmptyTrimmed. Yeh, I'm happy to miss it out. --- > > (plus isNotEmpty, isNotBlank, isEmptyNN, isBlankNN) > > Still hard to decide how far to go with all these. isEmptyNN is a > single-atom method. isNotEmpty just replaces a ! sign etc etc. The Nots are very useful for these cases as they are so frequent. --- > Does anyone actually want isEmptyNN, or is it just that people are unhappy > with the null-handling in StringUtils? In which case I think the NN is the > wrong solution, we need to be thinking about an ability to create a > StringUtils with a strategy or having an underlying hidden class and 3 > facade's for the different strategies. All 3.0. +1. Leave out NN for now. Its a bit of a hack. Stephen --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
