Le 03/05/2012 16:07, Thomas Neidhart a écrit : > Hi, Hi Thomas,
> > I have investigated MATH-627, and I think we can remove the additional null > checks (tested locally): > > * the iterators in RealVector and ArrayRealVector never return null as a > result from next() > * next() is only called when hasNext() returns true > > The thing I want to discuss is that RealVector is only an abstract class, > meaning that it may be used as base class for user specific implementations > (like in the test cases). > Now any implementation has to provide an iterator that follows the same > assumptions as in the base implementation, i.e. never return a null entry. > > Imo, an implementation that returns a null entry although the iterator > states it has more entries is buggy and thus should fail (atm, returning a > null entry would terminate while loops iterating over such an iterator). > So I think it should be safe to remove the null checks and add a note to > the javadoc that any derived classes have to return an iterator following > the same convention. > > Any objections? No problem from me, your rationale seems good. Luc > > Thomas > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
