Do Transitions really need to be final?

[Tom Schindl]

The list has some entries that only have an effect when the type you
have is subclassable. Makeing the class final prevents this.

Tom

Am 17.12.11 09:21, schrieb Tom Eugelink:
> 
> Ok. Eh. Ok? Any description on how that would be a problem?
> 
> Tom
> 
> 
> On 17-12-2011 9:15, Tom Schindl wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I can only guess but making something final makes evolving the API less
>> problematic.
>>
>> See
>> http://wiki.eclipse.org/Evolving_Java-based_APIs_2#Evolving_API_Classes
>> that e.g. adding a public field to a class which is allowed to be
>> subclassed might break binary compat.
>>
>> Am 17.12.11 08:32, schrieb Tom Eugelink:
>>>
>>> On 2011-12-17 08:25, Daniel Zwolenski wrote:
>>>> Hey Guys,
>>>>
>>>> Just wondering if there is a reason for the various transition classes
>>>> (FadeTransition, PathTransition, etc) being final?
>>>>
>>> I would even like to put that one step higher; why is any class final? I
>>> know that the fact that they are not in Swing have allowed for many
>>> improvements, unforeseen at the time Swing was created.
>>>
>>> Tom
>>>
>>
> 
> 


-- 
B e s t S o l u t i o n . a t                        EDV Systemhaus GmbH
------------------------------------------------------------------------
tom schindl                 geschäftsführer/CEO
------------------------------------------------------------------------
eduard-bodem-gasse 5-7/1   A-6020 innsbruck     fax      ++43 512 935833
http://www.BestSolution.at                      phone    ++43 512 935834