ok so will you mark it deprecated that way? On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 3:46 PM, Uwe Schindler <u...@thetaphi.de> wrote:
> Hi Shai, > > > > It exists, auto-generated by the compiler! But for deprecating and > javadocs, we have to explicitly create one. This is not a huge deal. And for > everybody it is clear (the @deprec message should tell, that this class > should be a singleton), that it will not be removed in 4.0, but instead made > private. > > > > This was a lapsus in the initial implementation (I have seen lots of these > faults, e.g. in commons.lang project, where all static utility classes > contain the default ctor, but the whole class is for static use only **g* > *). > > > > Uwe > > > > ----- > Uwe Schindler > H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen > http://www.thetaphi.de > eMail: u...@thetaphi.de > ------------------------------ > > *From:* Shai Erera [mailto:ser...@gmail.com] > *Sent:* Wednesday, December 02, 2009 2:26 PM > > *To:* java-dev@lucene.apache.org > *Subject:* Re: NoLockFactory does not have a private ctor > > > > So you believe someone actually does "new NoLockFactory()"? If so, we > should add the ctor as deprecated, because currently it does not exist, and > thus cannot be deprecated :). > > Of course, adding a deprecated empty ctor needs to be accompanied by proper > documentation to move it to private, or else it will be deleted, and we'll > have this thread again after 4.0 :). > > Shai > > On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 2:57 PM, Uwe Schindler <u...@thetaphi.de> wrote: > > I have seen this several times when working on oal.store. We should have > deprecated the ctor in 2.9 and removed in 3.0. For BW compatibility we have > to simply deprecate it and tell the user to take the singleton. > > > > Uwe > > ----- > Uwe Schindler > H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen > http://www.thetaphi.de > eMail: u...@thetaphi.de > ------------------------------ > > *From:* Shai Erera [mailto:ser...@gmail.com] > *Sent:* Wednesday, December 02, 2009 1:11 PM > *To:* java-dev@lucene.apache.org > *Subject:* NoLockFactory does not have a private ctor > > > > NoLockFactory documents in its javadocs that one should call the static > getNoLockFactory() in order to create an instance. The class however does > not have a private ctor, so someone can create another instance of it. This > is not a big deal though, because makeLock returns a static member. But it > looks like this class should follow the singleton pattern, however doesn't. > > Looks an easy fix to me. Can someone commit it, or do we need an issue? > > Shai > > >
