I think it is a case of "one standard per developer" :). IMO "private" and "final" should be used carefully in a framework, as people are always doing things we didn't expect them to do. I have that problem at work, where I have to "copy and paste reuse" code, because parts that I need to overwrite are private for no reason.
musachy On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 8:02 AM, Wes Wannemacher <[email protected]> wrote: > I am looking at subclassing JakartaMultiPartRequest and almost all of > the members are 'private final', but they are Lists and Maps, so I am > curious what the justification is... I want to subclass and get at the > data, obviously I'd have to change the declarations to protected, but > is final necessary? From what I can see, the only thing it guarantees > is that with each instance of JakartaMultiPartRequest, the Lists or > Maps will point to new instances. I guess what I'm wondering is if > there is an intention to follow a coding standard or something that > I'm missing because I don't see much point for these members to be > private or final (especially since it makes it pretty much impossible > for me to subclass it). > > -Wes > > -- > Wes Wannemacher > Author - Struts 2 In Practice > Includes coverage of Struts 2.1, Spring, JPA, JQuery, Sitemesh and more > http://www.manning.com/wannemacher > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > -- "Hey you! Would you help me to carry the stone?" Pink Floyd --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
