java - Is using Optional.ofNullable as a replacement for the ternary operator a good practice?

Question

Consider the usage of this expression:

String hi = Optional.ofNullable(sayHi()).orElse("-");

which effectively corresponds to this ternary expression:

String hi = sayHi() != null ? sayHi() : "-";

Is this usage of Optional.ofNullable with a method call a good practice? Or just extra verbose coding?

---

I recognise that Optional.ofNullable actually creates a variable and avoids calling the sayHi() method twice. To avoid this problem you actually could create an extra variable but this adds to the verbosity of the ternary option:

String hi = sayHi();
hi = hi != null ? hi : "-";

On the other hand Optional.ofNullable creates in case of hi not being null an extra Optional object. So there is for sure more overhead to it.

So there seem to be some pros and cons to using this type of construct to replace the ternary constructor.

---

By the way: this is the Java 8 implementation of Optional.ofNullable:

public static <T> Optional<T> ofNullable(T value) {
    return value == null ? empty() : of(value);
}

Answer 1

In JDK 9 or later, use this:

String hi = Objects.requireNonNullElse(sayHi(), "-");

This avoids having to repeat sayHi() if a ternary operator is used, or to assign its value to a local variable that is reused within the ternary. It might be a small improvement. It also sidesteps the question of whether to use Optional. :-)