Yep, those "_" classes where meant as internal classes and never for public API-like use. And if I remember right, they where all package private (you know, those weird classes that lack the access modifier ;-) in the beginning. Didn't realize they have been changed to public... Hmm Of course there is no real need for the "_" prefix in the shared classes. But in myfaces-api the prefix is a nice hint for the API users that this class is *not* meant for *them*. Even if the class is package-only visible, one could find this class in IDE "intellisense" suggest lists and be confused because there is no such class in the JSF spec. With the "_" prefix those classes should remain invisble, at least as long as the user does not look right into the jar. ;-)
Manfred On 11/22/06, Mario Ivankovits <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi! > in myfaces-api we have the same; > but nobody outside of myfaces-api uses them ;) > > so same should be true for shared as well... I think those _ thingies were introduces before the shared comes to live, so thats why we have them all around. If we think this breaks our "naming convention" we should deprecate the _ComponentUtils too and create a new ComponentUtils class. Then, you can delegate from _ComponentUtils to ComponentUtils. *hehe* :-D hihi, lol Ciao, Mario
