On Wed, 17 Feb 2021 18:24:39 GMT, Ian Graves <igra...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> 2 remarks: >> 1. MapN's entry set extends abstract set, whose `contains` is null-friendly >> like >> https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/cb84539d56209a6687c4ec71a61fdbe6f06a46ea/src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/AbstractCollection.java#L104 >> 2. The problem of unmodifiable map's entry set not always delegating >> everything to the backing entry set still exists. >> https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/cb84539d56209a6687c4ec71a61fdbe6f06a46ea/src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/Collections.java#L1724 >> This will bypass the underlying logic when the argument is `null` or not an >> entry. >> >> The behavior pointed out by michaelhixson is the conglomeration of these 2 >> unspecified behaviors. > > This raises some interesting issues and makes me wonder if we should allow a > single-wrap of the `ImmutableCollections` classes for now to make this less > onerous. Yes -- I think in response to this it makes more sense to pull the `ImmutableCollections` classes out for now and only focus on the wrapping of the classes within `Collections` so we aren't blocked by studying and rectifying these inconsistencies. ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/2596
