On Fri, 26 Aug 2022 17:46:44 GMT, Valerie Peng <valer...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> Right, but in this case I think if an NPE is ever thrown it would be >> considered a bug in the JDK because an unexpected RuntimeException would be >> thrown. I think requireNonNull is used more in cases where caller input is >> being validated and null is not valid. I find this code less readable. There >> are lots of cases in the JDK code where some object could theoretically be >> null, but it would be a bug if it was. If it was a normal case for a >> provider to sometimes be null here, then I would expect this code to check >> for null and handle it. >> >> @valeriep is more familiar with this code, so I would also like her feedback >> on these changes to use requireNonNull. > > I don't see much benefit of using Objects.requireNonNull() here also for the > reasons that Sean have already stated. @valeriepeng agrees with you Sean. I'll remove `requireNonNull` here and elsewhere unless there is a compelling reason to keep it. ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/9972
