desruisseaux commented on code in PR #2219:
URL: https://github.com/apache/maven/pull/2219#discussion_r2065789719
##########
impl/maven-impl/src/main/java/org/apache/maven/impl/DefaultDependencyResolverResult.java:
##########
@@ -102,19 +102,27 @@ public class DefaultDependencyResolverResult implements
DependencyResolverResult
* to {@link #addDependency(Node, Dependency, Predicate, Path)}.
*
* @param request the corresponding request
- * @param cache cache of module information about each dependency
* @param exceptions the exceptions that occurred while building the
dependency graph
* @param root the root node of the dependency graph
* @param count estimated number of dependencies
*/
public DefaultDependencyResolverResult(
+ DependencyResolverRequest request, List<Exception> exceptions,
Node root, int count) {
+ this(request, new PathModularizationCache(), exceptions, root, count);
+ }
+
+ DefaultDependencyResolverResult(
DependencyResolverRequest request,
PathModularizationCache cache,
List<Exception> exceptions,
Node root,
int count) {
this.request = request;
- this.cache = cache;
+ if (cache == null) {
Review Comment:
Yes, I agree that it is dereferenced without null checks, which is why the
proposal above was to use `Objects.requireNonNull` in the constructor. Then,
since the constructor become package-private as a result of the change in this
pull request, we can easily verify that all invocations of this constructor
pass a non-null cache. But anyway, this is not very important. We can leave it
as is for now and revisit after we determined where the cache should be stored.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org
