WARNING: Project is put on hold for a while. All development efforts are put on Pragmatica Lite.
Minimal set of Java classes necessary to apply Pragmatic Functional Java approaches in practice.
Current version requires Java 17 to build and run.
Instead of using this library as a dependency, it is highly suggested to just copy classes into your own codebase and adapt it to your needs.
In order to avoid performance penalty caused by using Pragmatic Functional Java approaches, all classes were designed
with performance in mind. In particular, despite inherently conditional behavior (empty vs nothing Option, success vs
failure Result), implementation does not use branching operator (if or ? ). Java compiler and JIT do the rest -
resulting performance virtually identical to traditional Java code with explicit null checks and exceptions.
It should be noted, that Result benchmark puts exception handling cases into rather convenient conditions, with very
short call stack and only one type of exception is generated. Exception stack trace is not accessed either. All these
conditions enabling much better optimization and don't trigger some resource-intensive processing (like printing stack
trace) which usually happens (for example, for logging) in real applications.
Benchmarks measure execution of same code under different rate of missing (error) cases. Rate set to 0% is equal to
happy day scenraio when there is no empty values (or errors/exceptions). With 100% rate all cases are empty/null
(error/exception) and usually show plain overhead caused by used handling method.
Test results were obtained on MacBook Pro M1. Results are reorganized to simplify direct comparison of different implementations for same use case.
Test results for Option:
Benchmark Mode Cnt Score Error Units
OptionPerformanceTest.nullable0 avgt 6 36.107 ± 0.456 us/op
OptionPerformanceTest.option0 avgt 6 35.085 ± 0.409 us/op
OptionPerformanceTest.nullable10 avgt 6 32.365 ± 0.064 us/op
OptionPerformanceTest.option10 avgt 6 31.938 ± 0.323 us/op
OptionPerformanceTest.nullable25 avgt 6 26.910 ± 0.828 us/op
OptionPerformanceTest.option25 avgt 6 26.347 ± 0.113 us/op
OptionPerformanceTest.nullable50 avgt 6 18.158 ± 0.119 us/op
OptionPerformanceTest.option50 avgt 6 17.688 ± 0.086 us/op
OptionPerformanceTest.nullable75 avgt 6 9.146 ± 0.198 us/op
OptionPerformanceTest.option75 avgt 6 8.844 ± 0.181 us/op
OptionPerformanceTest.nullable90 avgt 6 3.716 ± 0.022 us/op
OptionPerformanceTest.option90 avgt 6 3.599 ± 0.055 us/op
OptionPerformanceTest.nullable100 avgt 6 0.084 ± 0.001 us/op
OptionPerformanceTest.option100 avgt 6 0.087 ± 0.008 us/op
Test results for Result:
Benchmark Mode Cnt Score Error Units
ResultPerformanceTest.exception0 avgt 6 36.621 ± 0.045 us/op
ResultPerformanceTest.result0 avgt 6 35.215 ± 0.208 us/op
ResultPerformanceTest.exception10 avgt 6 32.651 ± 0.129 us/op
ResultPerformanceTest.result10 avgt 6 31.983 ± 0.112 us/op
ResultPerformanceTest.exception25 avgt 6 27.373 ± 0.240 us/op
ResultPerformanceTest.result25 avgt 6 26.472 ± 0.130 us/op
ResultPerformanceTest.exception50 avgt 6 18.239 ± 0.769 us/op
ResultPerformanceTest.result50 avgt 6 17.671 ± 0.101 us/op
ResultPerformanceTest.exception75 avgt 6 9.213 ± 0.597 us/op
ResultPerformanceTest.result75 avgt 6 9.019 ± 0.090 us/op
ResultPerformanceTest.exception90 avgt 6 3.705 ± 0.021 us/op
ResultPerformanceTest.result90 avgt 6 3.618 ± 0.019 us/op
ResultPerformanceTest.exception100 avgt 6 0.087 ± 0.001 us/op
ResultPerformanceTest.result100 avgt 6 0.086 ± 0.001 us/op