[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GROOVY-7177?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Eric Milles updated GROOVY-7177:
--------------------------------
Description:
{code:groovy}
def someCollection = null
someCollection.collect { e -> e.name } // returns []
someCollection*.name // returns null (or [] for SC)
someCollection.name // throws NullPointerException
{code}
Actual:
{{someCollection}} is null, with no typing hints as to what {{someCollection}}
really is, and yet it invokes {{.collect()}} on a null reference. How is that
possible without collect being a global function?
Expected:
All 3 situations throw a NPE. The spread operator seems to short circuit nulls
like the ?. operator. So really the spread operator is more like ?.* operator
which is maybe desirable. But it's not explicit that it does that and is a bit
surprising given we have the difference of . and ?. At the least this is
inconsistent between these various operations.
was:
{code}
def someCollection = null
someCollection.collect { x -> x.name } // returns []
someCollection.*name // returns null
someCollection.name // throws NPE
{code}
Actual:
someCollection is null, with no typing hints as to what someCollection really
is, and yet it invokes .collect() on a null reference. How is that possible
without collect being a global function?
Expected:
All 3 situations throw a NPE. The spread operator seems to short circuit nulls
like the ?. operator. So really the spread operator is more like ?.* operator
which is maybe desirable. But it's not explicit that it does that and is a bit
surprising given we have the difference of . and ?. At the least this is
inconsistent between these various operations.
> Calling collect on null doesn't result in a NPE
> -----------------------------------------------
>
> Key: GROOVY-7177
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GROOVY-7177
> Project: Groovy
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: groovy-runtime
> Affects Versions: 2.3.7
> Reporter: Charlie Hubbard
> Priority: Major
>
> {code:groovy}
> def someCollection = null
> someCollection.collect { e -> e.name } // returns []
> someCollection*.name // returns null (or [] for SC)
> someCollection.name // throws NullPointerException
> {code}
> Actual:
> {{someCollection}} is null, with no typing hints as to what
> {{someCollection}} really is, and yet it invokes {{.collect()}} on a null
> reference. How is that possible without collect being a global function?
> Expected:
> All 3 situations throw a NPE. The spread operator seems to short circuit
> nulls like the ?. operator. So really the spread operator is more like ?.*
> operator which is maybe desirable. But it's not explicit that it does that
> and is a bit surprising given we have the difference of . and ?. At the least
> this is inconsistent between these various operations.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
