This brings up an interesting side question. I think all methods that can be static (i.e. use no instance methods or fields) should be static -- unless explicitly intended to be overrideable. It simply reflects reality and adds flexibility. In critical sections it can improve performance.
If such methods were static, they can be. If they're private, they're not to be overridden. So I think they should be. I also bring it up since I think I *made* a number of such methods static, so we ought to agree. What's the argument for making them non-static, versus not accessing them via instance references? On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 10:29 AM, Hudson (JIRA) <[email protected]> wrote: > > [ > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MAHOUT-467?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12899801#action_12899801 > ] > > Hudson commented on MAHOUT-467: > ------------------------------- > > Integrated in Mahout-Quality #200 (See > [https://hudson.apache.org/hudson/job/Mahout-Quality/200/]) > MAHOUT-467: removed static modifiers on driver private methods that were > not invoked statically anyway >
