try-with-resources and null resource (original) (raw)

Reinier Zwitserloot reinier at zwitserloot.com
Thu Jan 27 22:54:45 PST 2011

I don't understand why one couldn't explain t-w-r by showing "if (resource != null) resource.close();" in the finally block.

It is then your opinion that this code is abusing the t-w-r construct, because Class.getResourceAsStream can return null?

try (InputStream introTextStream = getClass().getResourceAsStream("intro.txt")) { ... }

If so, we've clearly progressed into the "Everyone has their own 'feeling', none of them agree with each other, and making language decisions based on these feelings is a silly thing to do" phase. Let's check how often the above occurs. I'm betting it'll be "loads of times". Also contrast what you'd have to write if the above is not okay:

InputStream introTextStream1 = getClass().getResourceAsStream(); if (introTextStream1 != null) { try (InputStream introTextStream2 = introTextStream1) { ... } }

I assume I don't have to resort to 'feeling' to claim that the above is just bad.

--Reinier Zwitserloot

On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 7:38 AM, David Holmes <David.Holmes at oracle.com>wrote:

Tim Peierls said the following on 01/28/11 00:47: > I don't know about C#, but I like the formulation that can be sloppily > summarized as "t-w-r calls close on non-null resources".

So to summarize there are three potential candidates for: try (Resource r = getResource() { // stuff here } I'm ignoring the suppressed exception aspects for simplicity: a) Simple transformation into try-finally (current implemented semantics) Resource r = getResource(); try { // stuff here } finally { r.close(); } b) Transformation into try-finally with explicit null-check on entry Resource r = getResource(); Objects.requireNonNull(r); // heh heh - couldn't resist! try { // stuff here } finally { r.close(); } c) Simple transformation into try-finally but only close a non-null resource Resource r = getResource(); try { // stuff here } finally { if (r != null) r.close(); }

Option (a) is, perhaps, the most consistent with preserving the behaviour of current code that would be modified to use the new construct. This construct will be taught by analogy as it is the only effective way to explain things "try-with-resources behaves as-if you had written ....". That said I think existing code would have an explicit null-check to avoid the try-finally in the null case. And I think it is potentially risky to execute the try block only to have NPE thrown later. Option (c) seems appealing in some sense because there's no NPE's at all if you don't use "r", but I think that appeal is superficial. To me the fundamental question to ask is: what is try-with-resources for? And I believe the answer to that is to initialize, use and then clean-up an AutoCloseable object. So to me using try-with-resource on a resource that might be null is simply a mis-use of try-with-resources: if it can be null you can't autoclose it, so trying to is a programming error and programming errors should be detected and reported as early as possible. So to me option (b) is the preferred semantics for this new construct. David Holmes

More information about the coin-dev mailing list