> The convincing one applies to Java and C++: > if (constant.equals(object)) > instead of > if (object != null && object.equals(constant)) > actually looks easier to read. > > Though you are right about constants being pretty rare. > > > Your .sig is strangely appropriate... > > Not my invention, this is a pretty common one, used by many people > on the net. I actually have no idea where it comes from.
I think that this second is safer because using of null object caught/trow exception in any language, so you are checking at first if object exist and if you are using by calling object.equals.. --- +48 882 723907 http://Czekaj.net.pl/ Version: 3.12 GIT d- s: a+ C++ UB+++ P+ L- E--- W+++ N+ o-- K++ w++ O M++ V- PS+++ PE- Y+ PGP+ t 5 X+ R* tv+ b+ DI D++ G e+++ h! r% y+ --- https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=SQDJ4F2KX3LYG BZ WBK S.A. 1 Oddz. Wodzisław Śląski SWIFT BiC: WBKPPLPP PLN PL 66 1090 1766 0000 0001 1209 3433 EUR PL 74 1090 1766 0000 0001 1209 3433 GBP PL 62 1090 1766 0000 0001 1004 4671 _______________________________________________ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
