Am 20.12.2015 um 14:14 schrieb sebb:
On 20 December 2015 at 10:52, Felix Schumacher
<[email protected]> wrote:
Am 13.12.2015 um 14:11 schrieb Philippe Mouawad:
Hi Felix,
Do you have an example where it does not seem justified ?
I wondered why they were (and sometimes were not) used.
I stumbled upon the usage (or non usage) of final when looking at a findbugs
report on CsvSampleWriter. That class uses a overridable method setWriter
from its constructor, which findbugs finds "scary".
In other classes I found a few methods declared final and other not, without
a documentation, why those final classes are closed for further inheritance
and the others not.
I haven't looked, whether they were justified or not, I was just curious.
Final is required in some cases, e.g. methods called from constructor
(*) or parameter passed to nested class.
It is also potentially useful as a way of documenting that an item is
not intended to be altered (although of course that doesn't stop a
mutable object from being changed). This can be helpful when trying to
follow code.
Right, but I think this usage of final should be documented in the class
or methods.
Some people like to make everything possible final; I think that can
be distracting.
It looked just a bit random to me. All in all I tend to find, that
making parameters final is a good idea (does only local harm), but
making methods final should be done with documentation (is a design
decision for the possible inheritance usages of the class).
Regards,
Felix
(*) if a sub-class overrides the method, it may be called before the
class has been fully constructed so may fail in unexpected ways.
Regards,
Felix
Thanks
On Sunday, December 13, 2015, Felix Schumacher <
[email protected]> wrote:
Hi all,
I see a lot of methods in the newly added report package, that are
declared final.
What is the reasoning behind this?
Regards,
Felix
