Any chance of it getting a companion Type.emptyMap()?
[Str:Int]#.emptyMap
I know it's not quite the same (as emptyList() takes an item type, not the list type), but I do miss a empty Map singleton. I'd even settle for Map.defVal.
brianWed 23 Aug 2017
The reason emptyList makes sense is because the base type is a singleton and you can cache things. It wouldn't make sense for map types because they are created on the fly - so you wouldn't get the same cacheing performance. This would be probably as close as you could get:
SlimerDude Fri 14 Apr 2017
I use
Type.emptyList()
quite a lot:Any chance of it getting a companion
Type.emptyMap()
?I know it's not quite the same (as
emptyList()
takes an item type, not the list type), but I do miss a empty Map singleton. I'd even settle forMap.defVal
.brian Wed 23 Aug 2017
The reason emptyList makes sense is because the base type is a singleton and you can cache things. It wouldn't make sense for map types because they are created on the fly - so you wouldn't get the same cacheing performance. This would be probably as close as you could get: