Cool, I hear you loud and clear on not marking classes final. Glad we can come to some clear conclusions about conventions as I am sure the project will benefit as a result. I would not change anything myself that wasn't unanimously agreed upon, regardless of my own conclusions.
My only follow up is about array syntax... I don't necessarily see it as an arbitrary style preference. A String array is a "String[]"; to write it starting with just "String" seems possibly confusing as you don't immediately parse that as an array reference. It seems strongly conventional in Java to not use C-style syntax. That said, I don't see any instances of this in the code anyway. I mentioned it only because I saw some arrays declared as "String []" (extra space) and I suppose that's tiny but seems worth standardizing to "String[]". On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 8:46 PM, Shalin Shekhar Mangar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > +101. I've had some experiences with final classes where I had to extend > their functionality. I had to resort to clever class loader tricks to get > around them e.g. use same package+class name and put them in the war where > Tomcat would look first before looking into the jar in the lib directory. > > There are other pains where a public class depends on a package private > class for a large amount of functionality. It is very hard to rewrite the > functionality of the package private class when extending the public class. > The only easy solution is to either copy/paste the original code or use the > above class loader trick.
