If a method is so big, that you can no longer see if a local
variable/parameter is changed or not, then the method needs refactoring,
not the variables a modifier. So I see no need for adding this, unless
you want to express something by this.
bye Jochen
On 28.04.2016 02:11, John Wagenleitner wrote:
On Sun, Apr 24, 2016 at 11:13 PM, Mario Garcia <mario.g...@gmail.com
<mailto:mario.g...@gmail.com>> wrote:
+1
Besides, I was wondering If most, if not all these static methods,
should have all parameters marked as final. Is there any policy
about this ? Would it help ?
I don't think there's a policy, personally I tend to not use final for
local/parameters unless it's used in an anonymous inner class.
Hopefully the methods are short enough that the extra syntax is not
needed to know if it reassigned or not.
2016-04-24 21:46 GMT+02:00 Jochen Theodorou <blackd...@gmx.org
<mailto:blackd...@gmx.org>>:
On 24.04.2016 18 <tel:24.04.2016%2018>:12, John Wagenleitner wrote:
About to merge in PR 290 [1] and wanted to do a quick poll
to see if
there were any objections since it touches quite a few files
across core
and sub-modules. Any objections to merging this into
master? And
GROOVY_2_4_X?
[1] https://github.com/apache/groovy/pull/290
I guess it is ok. I did see two package private methods made
private instead of only private ones, but even those should be
ok. so unless I did oversee something I do not really have any
objection here.
bye Jochen
