See also my comment in the PR.
Gary
On Wed, Jun 12, 2024, 1:22 PM Department 8 <manstein.fe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Haha! It was in fact because of other methods that have simple negation
> that I thought maybe giving a PR would be Okay :)
>
> I think that many times, it is the Boolean Logic that may trivial for us,
> but for some who may be using them to have a utility methods like
> isNotBlank aka (!isBlank) maybe helpful and would de-clutter the client
> code to a good extent. So it is more of a clean fix for them.
>
> Another way may be to - do a for loop on all of them and once you find
> NotBlank to be true you return true, else iterate till end and return false
> (the actual negated logic of isAllBlank) but that would mean for the
> clients of the API to write that helper function for themselves. So this
> can provide an easy wrap.
>
> On Wed, 12 Jun 2024 at 22:43, Alex Herbert <alex.d.herb...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 12 Jun 2024 at 18:03, Department 8 <manstein.fe...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Sorry Alex just now saw your email, before sending out the PR!
> > >
> > > I had done just for isAllEmpty and isAllBlank.
> > >
> > > Can you tell me more on what can be done, when you said the following:
> > >
> > > If you are simply negating the result of another method then this use
> > case
> > > may be better served with addition of a suitable example to the javadoc
> > of
> > > the method you are negating.
> > >
> > > Like do you want me to add examples of use-cases?
> > >
> >
> > I've seen the PR. The new methods are a simple boolean negation of
> existing
> > methods. So these are not adding functionality that cannot be achieved
> with
> > the current API.
> >
> > Note that a quick check in StringUtils for 'return !' finds these
> methods:
> >
> > public static boolean isNoneBlank(final CharSequence... css) {
> > return !isAnyBlank(css);
> > }
> >
> > public static boolean isNoneEmpty(final CharSequence... css) {
> > return !isAnyEmpty(css);
> > }
> >
> > There are two others for single CharSequence args as well: isNotBlank and
> > isNotEmpty.
> >
> > So it is not without precedent to add more methods that are simple
> > negations. However we have to consider if this is code bloat, or if the
> > addition of simple negation methods is so useful that it warrants
> > inclusion. I would currently consider this as redundant given the lack of
> > actual logic in the methods.
> >
> > Alex
> >
> >
> > >
> > > On Wed, 12 Jun 2024 at 22:29, Department 8 <manstein.fe...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I just realized the subject name is bad. But here are the two small
> > > > methods I propose - *isAnyNotBlank* and *isAnyNotEmpty*.
> > > >
> > > > Please find the pull request as here:
> > > > https://github.com/apache/commons-lang/pull/1234
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, 12 Jun 2024 at 21:52, Department 8 <manstein.fe...@gmail.com
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Hey!
> > > >>
> > > >> Recently when using StringUtils in one of our projects I had felt
> the
> > > >> urgent need to have a utility method like => isAnyNotBlank.
> > > >>
> > > >> I was able to achieve this using the negation of isAllBlank, so I am
> > > >> thinking of introducing the code with all tests.
> > > >>
> > > >> It is ready to be pushed to PR. Do let me know what you think and
> what
> > > >> are the next steps for the same?
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
>
