changed isNullAllListElements() => isAnyListElementNotNull(): the duplicate negation at usage time breaks my brain ;-)
This depends of the POV you see it:
isNullAllListElements() -> This is not a negation. It check if :
All elements on the List are null. Where is the negation?
isAnyListElementNotNull() -> Here is a negation "Not null" :-D
Hmm, that's true. But what I meant was the usage of !isNullAllListElements and ListElement != null inside the function.
What you are really testing for is the availableness/usability of the list for unique identification. So the function itself should not return true if it only contains nulls.
Generally speaking, negative forms should be avoided, as their interpretation may be difficult depending on people's linguistic background. I used to work with Japanese people long time ago, and I'm sure this name, even with a single negation, would be very hard for them to understand.
So what about "hasNonNullElements()"?
Yes, this might be more obvious/understandable than "any" and "not" in my version.
Joerg
