Your question is based on assumption that the code which may throw NullPointerException
is worse than the code which may not. This assumption is wrong. If you expect that your foobar
is never null due to the program logic, it's much better to use Optional.of(foobar)
as you will see a NullPointerException
which will indicate that your program has a bug. If you use Optional.ofNullable(foobar)
and the foobar
happens to be null
due to the bug, then your program will silently continue working incorrectly, which may be a bigger disaster. This way an error may occur much later and it would be much harder to understand at which point it went wrong.
In addition, If you know your code should not work if object is null, you can throw exception by using Optional.orElseThrow
String nullName = null;
String name = Optional.ofNullable(nullName)
.orElseThrow(NullPointerException::new);
// .orElseThrow(CustomException::new);
This depends upon scenarios.
Let's say you have some business functionality and you need to process something with that value further but having null
value at time of processing would impact it.
Then, in that case, you can use Optional<?>
.
String nullName = null;
String name = Optional.ofNullable(nullName)
.map(<doSomething>)
.orElse("Default value in case of null");
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