harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Geir Magnusson Jr." <g...@pobox.com>
Subject Re: [vmi] Retrieving system properties
Date Tue, 19 Dec 2006 13:42:18 GMT


Oliver Deakin wrote:
> Alexey Varlamov wrote:
>> 2006/12/15, Geir Magnusson Jr. <geir@pobox.com>:
>>>
>>>
>>> Oliver Deakin wrote:
>>> <snip>
>>> It answers the question above, but didn't answer my earlier question (I
>>> think I asked, of why *not* to have (key, NULL)?  The impl of
>>> System.getProperty() can enforce the API of System.getProperty(), but if
>>> we find it useful as a general facility in the VMI, why not?
>>
>> Well, IMO the equvalent question is: do we really find (key, NULL) so
>> useful that ready to bear inconvenience or ambiguity of mapping such
>> VMI properties to Java?
> 
> Exactly what I was thinking. I guess we're looking at two different 
> sides of the coin -
> Geir is thinking "why not have (key, NULL)?" and we are thinking "why have
> (key, NULL)?". To be honest, Im not sure there's a convincing argument 
> on either
> side, since we have no actual example of a time when we may or may not want
> a NULL value for a key. So I veer slightly towards not having NULL 
> values just
> to match the Java API (and avoid an extra check in System.getProperty()) 
> until
> we have a good reason to allow them.

In which case the addition of the thing will probably be way more 
expensive...

Anyway, I give...

geir

> 
> Regards,
> Oliver
> 
>>
>>>
>>> The only reason I can think of is to avoid the extra NULL check (in
>>> Java), but you have to look at the result code anyway when using
>>> GetSystemProp(), right?
>>>
>>> geir
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> >
>>> > Regards,
>>> > Oliver
>>> >
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Regards,
>>> >>> Oliver
>>> >>>
>>> >>> > geir
>>> >>> >
>>> >>>
>>> >>> --
>>> >>> Oliver Deakin
>>> >>> IBM United Kingdom Limited
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>
> 

Mime
View raw message