Comments on Impossible Siebel: Checking for an empty (Strong Typed) String

Hi toxcct The conclusion is not wrong =). You sho...

2010-05-18T23:53:55.134+10:00

Hi toxcct

The conclusion is not wrong =). You should look at it from the perspective of what Siebel version you are on.

The use of valueOf() for comparisons is still neccesary (tested on 8.1.1 and 8.1.1.2). Its best to verify this for yourself.

If you do decide to change the type your primitives, beaware of the effect that this will have on your program logic.

The conclusion is wrong about performances, and al...

2010-05-15T00:21:56.504+10:00

The conclusion is wrong about performances, and also are you about the use of valueOf.
In the link you provided in your conclusion, there is a paragraph before their own conclusion, named "Update - 4/4/2007".
In this paragraph, they explain that Siebel fixed the lack of performances of ST scripts Also, they say that the use of valueOf is no more necessary (it is implicitely called when refering the String object instance in a string context)

thank you very much

2010-03-02T01:32:38.020+11:00

thank you very much

Good Article Jason ! -Geeksajan http://ge...

2010-02-21T03:10:59.645+11:00

Good Article Jason !
-Geeksajan
http://geeksajan.blogspot.com

Very thorough article, thanks! We've no fixed ...

2010-02-19T08:22:36.202+11:00

Very thorough article, thanks!
We've no fixed best practice regarding strong typing on our project. Personally I like the idea of typing and treating things as objects (I started in C++, then Java, might be something to do with that!) I think the first pitfall is the most common, and usually enough to deter against any further use of the STing.