Sorry - not taking the time to properly think.
I got stuck on overriding - was thinking a lot on it on an earlier issue.
Scratch that.
{quote}Not sure how making it protected breaks backcompat. If people are
calling it directly (in their own inverter? Not sure if that would ever
happen) they'd be getting the wrong result after the change, because the
(String, int) version actually becomes the correct public API to find
the gap.{quote}
Thats a break in back compat - but I guess your saying even if its
public its a break.
Thats a tough one to push through in my mind then. Though the rarity of
it affecting anyone might lure someone else to take it on.
--
- Mark
http://www.lucidimagination.com
Paul Cowan wrote:
Mark Miller wrote:
Why wouldn't people overriding the method be declaring it as
protected as well?
I'm talking about _existing_ code... i.e. if someone already has:
public class CrazyAnalyzer ... {
public int getPositionIncrementGap(String field) {
return random.nextInt(100);
}
}
then my change (making gPIG(String) protected) won't break it. It will
also continue to behave as expected due to the default impl of
gPIG(String, int).
Presumably people who are implementing new analyzers after this would
make it protected, but it won't break back-compat of existing public
overrides.
Paul
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
