I have a question regarding Java 8's Optional, the purpose of which is to tackle NullPointerException
exceptions.
The question is, what is the reason for having both types to let us choose:
Optional.of(T value) <-----non-null value, null value will throw NPE Optional.ofNullable(T value) <----- nullable value
Because what I expect is, when I use:
Optional.of(nullValue);
It won't throw a NullPointerException
.
Expanded my question after some replies:
Why would people opt for Optional instead of normal if-else
for null checking?
So instead of returning null you can wrap it with an optional object by making of Optional. ofNullable() . And when you have a method that returns Optional with several conditional statements, and there's a case when you are certain that the produced value is non-null, then you should use Optional. of() .
The ofNullable() method is used to get an instance of the Optional class with a specified value. If the value is null , then an empty Optional object is returned.
So, to overcome this, Java 8 has introduced a new class Optional in java. util package. It can help in writing a neat code without using too many null checks. By using Optional, we can specify alternate values to return or alternate code to run.
ofNullable. Returns an Optional describing the specified value, if non-null, otherwise returns an empty Optional .
The javadoc of Optional.of
reads that explicitly :
@throws NullPointerException if value is null
and that is where the requirement of handling the cases as expected by you comes into picture with the use of Optional.ofNullable
which is a small block of code as :
public static <T> Optional<T> ofNullable(T value) { return value == null ? empty() : of(value); // 'Optional.of' }
That said, the decision of choosing one over the other would still reside with the application design as if your value
could possibly be null
or not.
On your expectation part, that was not what the Optional
was actually intended for. The API note clarifies this further (formatting mine):
Optional
is primarily intended for use as a method return type where there is a clear need to represent "no result," and where usingnull
is likely to cause error. A variable whose type isOptional
should never itself benull
; it should always point to anOptional
instance.
purpose of Optional is to tackle NullPointerException exception.
Aside: Just to call it out clearly, that the choice would of course implicitly let you define if an NPE should be thrown at runtime or not. It's not determined at the compile time though.
the purpose of Optional is to tackle
NullPointerException
exception
Yes, it is, but at usage time not at creation.
So when you receive an Optional
from a method then you can avoid NPE by using Optional.ifPresent
, Optional.orElse
,Optional.orElseGet
and Optional.orElseThrow
methods.
But this is not the case when you're creating an Optional. Since it's your own method you have to know whether the object is nullable or not.
The main point of Optional is to provide a means for a function returning a value to indicate the absence of a return value. See this discussion. This allows the caller to continue a chain of fluent method calls.
Stuart Marks
Please read this post for more detailed explanation.
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With