Actually don't check SingletonList as comment says. #1132
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
codefromthecrypt
approved these changes
Mar 31, 2020
| // avoid copying datastructure by trusting certain names. | ||
| String simpleName = extra.getClass().getSimpleName(); | ||
| return simpleName.equals("SingletonList") |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
that SingletonList isn't here hurts my brain because it is a well known type. that said I understand why you are doing this.. it is under the assumption nothing else is using this method which is fair enough. It might hurt brain less to say intentionally not checking SingletonList due as the only call site wont' have it
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Good call, added a comment both for that and because I realized the empty list check was similarly redundant.
|
thanks! |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Noticed implementation does not reflect the comment "Faster to make a copy than check the type to see if it is already a singleton list". I haven't actually benchmarked this but it seems to make sense. Alternatively I can revert the code changes and remove the comment, let me know.
Additionally optimizes for an empty mutable list parameter.