k

lemme work on that
(already opend an issue)

the pubic in the class was in that particular case the weired thing
here for me ;)

-M

On 11/23/06, Manfred Geiler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
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
>
>



--
Matthias Wessendorf
http://tinyurl.com/fmywh

further stuff:
blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com

Reply via email to