Geoff Little
2017-08-30 16:29:24 UTC
Does this remain the recommended way to deal with Optional constructor
arguments?
you get to supply your own fallback value such as NoOpAirConditioner.
If we permitted optionality on a parameter-by-parameter basis, our
poor users would have to cope with null.
arguments?
Do you think it's bad idea?
Yeah, I don't think it pulls its weight. With the current solution,you get to supply your own fallback value such as NoOpAirConditioner.
If we permitted optionality on a parameter-by-parameter basis, our
poor users would have to cope with null.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "google-guice" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to google-guice+***@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to google-***@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/google-guice.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-guice/4d3812e1-9e44-445b-a93d-d46741a3aef0%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "google-guice" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to google-guice+***@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to google-***@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/google-guice.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-guice/4d3812e1-9e44-445b-a93d-d46741a3aef0%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.