I’m a bit curious on the desire to split it out. I’m not hard opposed but also don’t know that it would save much time or clarify things for most. I wouldn’t want to say that this is a critical reason for keeping things as they are, but I’d imagine that your typical dev doesn’t use StringUtils for abbreviate or getLevenshteinDistance style-features nearly as often as they do for length and indexOf to avoid onerous unit tests.
On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 7:53 AM Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi All: > > Right now we have a giant class called StringUtils. I have code that in my > own library that has at least one null-safe API that for Strings. For > example a String.getBytes(String, Charset) that returns a null byte[] if > the input String is null. > > I'd like to propose a new class called NullSafeStrings, that covers all > String APIs (there aren't that many) for null-safe String input. If some of > these APIs are already in StringUtils, those would be deprecated and point > to NullSafeStrings. > > Note that I am not using the "Utils" postfix on purpose since I find it > meaning less and the JRE now uses the plural form for this kind of code; > see Files and Paths. > > Thoughts? > > Gary >
