Clean it up as you go.
Use private where private is appropriate and protected where it applies.
When in doubt, go drink a beer.
--jason
On Sat, 4 Aug 2001, marc fleury wrote:
> ok I see why the big noise.
>
> No please don't make the stuff private and leave it protected there are many
> abstract classes throughout the code and making getter/setter calls is just
> OO poopoo imho. Plus you are up for a lot of work, cause there is a lot of
> it, and it is little gain for us.
>
> If it ain't broken... man work on CMP 2.0 that is *real* stuff ;-)
>
> marcf
>
> |-----Original Message-----
> |From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> |[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Dain
> |Sundstrom
> |Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 2:19 PM
> |To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> |Subject: [JBoss-dev] package level fields
> |
> |
> |Does anyone know why all of the fields in org.jboss.ejb.Application are
> |declared with package (default) access? Most of the classes that I have
> |looked at in org.jboss.ejb have fields with package access. If
> |there is not
> |a good reason, I suggest that we make these private as this helps to
> |prevent spaghetti code.
> |
> |I'm willing to change the code, and make sure that all the test run. I
> |wouldn't do it right away but in a couple of weeks.
> |
> |-dain
> |
> |
> |
> |_______________________________________________
> |Jboss-development mailing list
> |[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> |http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Jboss-development mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
>
_______________________________________________
Jboss-development mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
