thats why i said for internal API protection.
public api shouldn't change, but i guess thats not always what we can
guarantee

johan


On 8/17/07, Igor Vaynberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 8/17/07, Johan Compagner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > I think it is most of the time the responsibility of the developer
> itself.
> > If i want to override then i want to override
>
>
> but if that method is not meant to be overridable then the chances are it
> is
> going to change in the next release and you have to rewrite your code.
> this
> might be ok for method where you call super and then add something, but
> for
> methods where you replace functionality it can be a headache. making
> something overridable is pretty much a contract saying: the scope and
> functionality of this method wont change. most people dont think about
> that,
> they just make it nonfinal by default and later change it at a whim. hell
> some people make everything public....
>
> -igor
>

Reply via email to