kotlinlang #announcements

Yeah, but I don't expect the exception to be thrown for a different reason - THE FREAKING KEY IS IN THE MAP. I have a map from strings to nullable ints, I expect to get a nullable int for every key in the map, exception to be thrown if the key isn't in the map.

pedrol

12/28/2016, 12:18 AM

well, the implementation for getOrElse is:

get(key) ?: defaultValue()

vishal-reddy

12/28/2016, 12:18 AM

Copy code

val map = mapOf("foo" to 1, "bar" to null)
val x = map.getOrElse("bar") { null }
val y = x ?: throw Exception("bad stuff”)

mikrobak

12/28/2016, 12:20 AM

@vishal-reddy Sure, I know how to do that, I just don't agree with how null is treated in the implementation of

getOrElse

getOrElse

currently doesn't recognise

null

as a legitimate value that could be in the map. And it should IMO.

pedrol

12/28/2016, 12:21 AM

I particularly agree with the way it's implemented

pedrol

12/28/2016, 12:21 AM

maybe I'm just used to it

👍 1

mikrobak

12/28/2016, 12:21 AM

the implementation of

getOrElse

should be something along the lines of

Copy code

if (containsKey(key)) get(key) else defaultValue()

kevinmost

12/28/2016, 12:22 AM

I would expect it to be implemented with

containsKey

as well, personally

pedrol

12/28/2016, 12:23 AM

but then you get 2 lookups instead of one for a behavior that is useful only if you expect to give meaning to null. In which case I think you should be explicit and implement your check with

containsKey

mikrobak

12/28/2016, 12:24 AM

@pedrol I would rather want the implementation to be correct and doing what the documentation is saying, than to be performant

mikrobak

12/28/2016, 12:25 AM

And the docs are saying that this is getting you the value if the key is in the map

pedrol

12/28/2016, 12:25 AM

for your behavior you can use

getOrElseNullable

mikrobak

12/28/2016, 12:25 AM

which is internal

pedrol

12/28/2016, 12:25 AM

oh yeah haha

pedrol

12/28/2016, 12:25 AM

missed that

kevinmost

12/28/2016, 12:26 AM

getOrElse

as it's implemented just doesn't seem useful to me. Why would I do

map.getOrElse("foo") { defaultValue }

when I could do

map["foo"] ?: defaultValue

which is much more idiomatic?

mikrobak

12/28/2016, 12:28 AM

exactly - I wouldn't expect

null

to be treated as a pseudo-error-code for a lack of a key in the map when using

getOrElse

pedrol

12/28/2016, 12:33 AM

actually I agree with you @mikrobak

😀 2

mikrobak

12/28/2016, 12:33 AM

I will issue a bug later today (it's 1:30 AM where I'm at, I'm kinda sleepy :P) and try to get a solution working.

mikrobak

12/28/2016, 12:35 AM

I suppose I'll spend most of the time at setting up my environment and getting the build system to work 😄

douglarek

12/28/2016, 1:12 AM

defaultValue in

map.getOrElse("foo") { defaultValue }

can be multiple lines while

map["foo"] ?: defaultValue

can not be a fun block

hackerham

12/28/2016, 1:18 AM

it can be, you just need "with" or "let" for something 🙂

douglarek

12/28/2016, 1:23 AM

yeah you use let why not directly use

map.getOrElse("foo") { defaultValue }

mzgreen

12/28/2016, 9:19 AM

Is there a way to enable

all-open

plugin for specific configurations? For example only when running tests?

yoavst

12/28/2016, 10:17 AM

var x: Float = 0

Is this syntax going to be supported?

mobigeek

12/28/2016, 10:18 AM

what for is

var x = 0f

not being simpler?

miha-x64

12/28/2016, 10:18 AM

var x: Float = 0f

is OK also

yoavst

12/28/2016, 10:20 AM

I prefer the explicit form for public variables

enleur

12/28/2016, 10:20 AM

var x = 0.0

miha-x64

12/28/2016, 10:20 AM

it is Double, isn’t it?