I think it's really necessary to look at the bigger picture rather than worrying about having a null check in place. The delegator methods that return a List pretty much never return null, so the only time that specific list will be null is when an EntityException is thrown. So IMO the main problem with the methods in ContactMechWorker are that they silently (aside from logging) absorb those exceptions and then try to carry on as if nothing went wrong.
IMO those methods should probably have a 'throws EntityException' declaration added and then all the catch blocks and list<GenericValue> != null checks removed. There is so much wrong in that class though, it could do with plenty of other work as well. Regards Scott On 21/03/2012, at 4:24 AM, Erwan de FERRIERES wrote: > 2012/3/20 Jacques Le Roux <jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com>: >> BTW, this shows how stupid is the for loop in Java implementation. The >> suggested safeList() should be handled by the compiler IMO, I >> see no gains to not have it in but to get NPEs. Did I miss something? >> > Nothing. Is there an implementation of this safeList() in commons ? > > I think I will keep the while as they are, and work only on those > which only have the .hasNext(). > > Thanks for your comments ! > >> Jacques >> >> From: "Paul Foxworthy" <p...@cohsoft.com.au> >> >>> Hi Erwan, >>> >>> To be sure there is no Null Pointer Exception, yes, you need to test for >>> null first. One possibility is to just let the NPE happen. >>> >>> The discussion at >>> >>> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2250031/null-check-in-an-enhanced-for-loop >>> >>> suggests >>> >>> for( Object o : safe( list ) ) { >>> // do whatever >>> } >>> >>> Where safe would be: >>> >>> public static List safe( List other ) { >>> return other == null ? Collections.EMPTY_LIST : other; >>> } >>> >>> Cleaner code. I suspect the method would be inlined by most Java >>> compilers. >>> >>> Cheers >>> >>> Paul Foxworthy >>> >>> >>> Erwan de FERRIERES-3 wrote >>>> >>>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> I'm trying to remove a lot of iterators, and use the for-each syntax, >>>> which exists since java 1.5. >>>> During my journey, I found a lot of double tests for a while like this >>>> one: >>>> >>>> while (typePurposes != null && typePurposes.hasNext()) { >>>> (ContactMechWorker.java line 606) >>>> >>>> Can it be simplified to for(GenericValue contactMechTypePurpose : >>>> theList) ? Or should I keep it like it is ? >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Erwan de FERRIERES >>>> www.nereide.biz >>>> >>> >>> ----- >>> -- >>> Coherent Software Australia Pty Ltd >>> http://www.cohsoft.com.au/ >>> >>> Bonsai ERP, the all-inclusive ERP system >>> http://www.bonsaierp.com.au/ >>> >>> -- >>> View this message in context: >>> http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/loop-code-simplification-tp4487741p4488324.html >>> Sent from the OFBiz - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > > > -- > Erwan de FERRIERES
