Hi Bernd, In some respects “default” is easy. It can only occur on non-abstract methods on interfaces, and declaring such methods “public” is redundant (as is the case for abstract methods on interfaces, where also declaring “abstract” is redundant). [*] And there are more redundant cases related to enums and nested classes.
A further clean up would to run relevant code inspections in the IDE to remove redundant declarations. Paul. [*] FWIW there are a few cases of “public default” and “default public” in the OpenJDK source code On 16 Sep 2015, at 04:48, [email protected] wrote: > Martin, this will be known as the "blame martin" patch, good work. > > But more seriously a minor thing I noticed in your shell script (as well as > the mentioned sources and some coding guidelines), the new interface > `default` method modifier is not defined in any of those lists. > > Not sure if it is actually a problem for this patch (there seems to be no > line with default modifier), but its just a general observation (with the > hidden hope to get an authoritative consensus of the location of `default` as > well, even when it might be the wrong mailinglist). > > Greetings > Bernd > -- > http://bernd.eckenfels.net > > -----Original Message----- > From: Martin Buchholz <[email protected]> > To: core-libs-dev <[email protected]>, Chris Hegarty > <[email protected]>, Paul Sandoz <[email protected]> > Sent: Mi., 16 Sep. 2015 2:54 > Subject: RFR: 8136583: Core libraries should use blessed modifier order > > Hi, Chris and Paul, > I'd like you to do a very boring code review. > > This change is entirely machine generated. (the script is more interesting) > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~martin/webrevs/openjdk9/blessed-modifier-order/blessed-modifier-order.patch > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8136583
