my preference - however slight - is to avoid specifying the public. In
other words, if I'm writing the code, I won't put it in, but if someone
else does, I don't consider it an issue.
whatever others decide is fine with me. can't we just leave it open to
the preference of the original author?
Nathan Bubna wrote:
On 4/5/07, Greg Reddin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 4/5/07, Martin Cooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 2. The "public" redundant modifier is declared illegal in that
> > checkstyle file, but I think that it is not so bad.
>
>
> Here I disagree. IMHO, using 'public' in interfaces demonstrates a
lack of
> clarity. It constitutes "noise" in the interface definition that
hinders
> rapid comprehension. When someone reads through a set of interfaces and
> sees
> 'public' scattered around, they're likely to stop and wonder if the
author
> had some purpose to specifying 'public' that they should try to
> understand,
> when in reality the author was simply not thinking clearly enough to
> translate their thoughts into accurate interface definitions. We should
> always strive for maximum communication bandwidth, and not clutter the
> code
> with things that readers will trip over and have to stop and wonder
about.
-0 hindering rapid comprehension is *highly* subjective. it depends
on what you are trying to comprehend and what you are used to. in
this instance that is apparently different for you and me. :)
Interesting. I've always preferred to be explicit and express things
that
are true by default.
agreed. i also like that the method signature looks like it does in
the implementation class. i prefer the consistency...
For example, I use "this." a lot (though probably not
consistently enough to communicate anything). I can see your point
but the
lack of the public modifier would "hinder rapid comprehension" for me,
just
because I'm used to seeing it there. (To be real honest I didn't
realize it
was defaulted until I read this - though it makes sense).
So should we cater to those who don't know the language well enough or
cater
to those who prefer language purit? Personally, I still prefer the
former
because I like being explicit, but I won't die on that hill. I'm
willing to
be convinced otherwise :-)
i don't really care. to me it's a fairly trivial preference. and
whatever "hindrance" the lack of "public" might be to my comprehension
is entirely negligible. :)
Greg
