`String.emptyArray()` may be better
Cheers,
Daniel.Sun
-
Daniel Sun
Apache Groovy committer
Blog: http://blog.sunlan.me
Twitter: @daniel_sun
--
Sent from: http://groovy.329449.n5.nabble.com/Groovy-Dev-f372993.html
How would you return an empty multi-dimensional array? Your original proposal
would cover that, correct? String[][].emptyArray()
Under your new proposal, String.emptryArray() -> String[], is this it
String[].emptyArray() -> String[][]?
I do prefer "String.emptryArray()" at first glance. On
In keeping with the design of "Collections.emptyList()",
"Collections.emptySet()", etc. What about a DGSM on java.util.Arrays?
Something like "Arrays.emptyArray()" which would accept generics or coercion
like the Collections methods.
String[] empty = Arrays.emptyArray()
def empty = Arrays.e
> String[].emptyArray() -> String[][]?
true
> Arrays.emptyArray()
or `Arrays.emptyArray(String[])`, but they look a bit verbose...
Cheers,
Daniel.Sun
-
Daniel Sun
Apache Groovy committer
Blog: http://blog.sunlan.me
Twitter: @daniel_sun
--
Sent from: http://groovy.329449.n5.nabble.com
Despite "In keeping with the design of...": Why not go Groovy here and
supply this as a property ?
E.g.:
String[].emptyArray
?
(Would imho also expresses more that the resulting object is shared...)
Cheers,
mg
Am 28.11.2018 um 16:42 schrieb Milles, Eric (TR Tech, Content & Ops):
In keepi
