Optional vs if/else-if performance java 8
There is a third form (allowing still some variation).
return Stream.<Supplier<Object>>of(message::getA, message::getB, message::getC)
.map(Supplier::get)
.filter(Objects::nonNull)
.findFirst()
.orElse(null);
Probably the least flexible and efficient at this moment, but clear.
tl;dr
If your goal is condensed code, then use ternary chaining. Performance is likely identical to that of a series of if-then-else statements.
( this.getA() != null ) ? this.getA()
: ( this.getB() != null ) ? this.getB()
: ( this.getC() != null ) ? this.getC()
: null;
Ternary chaining
As the Answer by Lino correctly states, you are trying to take Optional
beyond their original design purpose (returning values within lambdas & streams). Generally best to use Optional
only with a return
statement, and only then when you want to make clear that null is a valid value to be returned. See this Answer by Brian Goetz.
A ternary operator is a condensed if-then-else
, combined into a one-liner.
result = test ? valueToUseIfTestIsTrue : valueToUseIfTestIsFalse
Example:
Color color = isPrinterMonochrome ? Color.GREY : Color.GREEN ;
Use a chain of ternary statements.
So this:
if ( this.getA() != null )
return this.getA();
else if ( this.getB() != null )
return this.getB();
else if ( this.getC() != null )
return this.getC();
else return null;
…becomes this:
return
( this.getA() != null ) ? this.getA()
: ( this.getB() != null ) ? this.getB()
: ( this.getC() != null ) ? this.getC()
: null;
Example code.
public String getA ()
{
// return "A";
return null;
}
public String getB ()
{
// return "B";
return null;
}
public String getC ()
{
return "C";
// return null;
}
public String getABC ()
{
if ( this.getA() != null )
return this.getA();
else if ( this.getB() != null )
return this.getB();
else if ( this.getC() != null )
return this.getC();
else return null;
}
public String getABCTernary ()
{
return
( this.getA() != null ) ? this.getA()
: ( this.getB() != null ) ? this.getB()
: ( this.getC() != null ) ? this.getC()
: null;
}
Run that example code.
String s = this.getABCTernary();
System.out.println( "s: " + s );
C
Pros and cons
- The upside to the ternary chain is condensed code, collapsed into a one-liner.
- The downside is that you are calling your getter method twice in this particular situation just to get a single value. Not a problem for a simple fetch-the-variable kind of getter, but impact performance if the getter is a time-consuming method such as a remote web services call. And, the cascading if-then-else has the same problem, also calling your getter twice.
Performance
how these two compare in terms of performance
The ternary operator in Java is "short-circuiting", meaning the left or right side that matches the test results is the only code called. In our code here, if getA
returns a non-null value, that value is returned immediately. The further calls to getB
and getC
are never executed. So in this regard, the performance of the chained ternary is the same as a cascading if-then-else statement: first-match wins, no further calls.
If you mean performance as in nanoseconds of execution, I do not know. Worrying about that would be falling into the trap of premature optimization. Modern JVMs are extremely well-tuned for optimizing your code.
Don't use Optional
s for conditional logic.
They were designed, to be returned from a method to indicate a potentially absent value.
Just because you can nicely chain them into a single line doesn't mean that it's understandable. Also you literally gain nothing. The performance overhead may be significant. In the worst case N
objects being created and then discarded. Just stay with your "normal" if-else
chains.
Instead of finding ways to make your current code more readable, take a step back and ask yourself why you need 15-20 if-else statements. Can you split some logic up? Why do you need a getter for so many different fields with potentially different types in the first place? etc.