Explicit public on static interface methods?
Ali Ebrahimi
ali.ebrahimi1781 at gmail.com
Wed May 15 00:20:42 PDT 2013
Hi
Please don't change default accessibility for interfaces or classes. this
conventions comes from java 1.0 days.
if we want some day (java 9) to allow (static or non-static) non-public
members in interfaces make them explicit. for this we can add 'package'
keyword to modifier lists.
Ali Ebrahimi
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 4:20 AM, Brian Goetz <brian.goetz at oracle.com> wrote:
> John Rose made this observation/suggestion:
>
> Implicit public considered risky: After working for a while on a new
> interface, I realized that all the methods I coded without an explicit
> "public" keyword were still public. I was using them as package privates
> shared between the interface and some package-private implementation logic.
> Oops. Did not discover this until I was preparing a javadoc for public
> review. That feels a little too late. Our processes would block me from
> accidentally introducing a public static, but that might not be true of
> customers.
>
> Suggest requiring a "public" on "static" interface members. Will reduce
> confusion if we allow non-public statics in the future.
>
>
More information about the lambda-spec-observers
mailing list