On 25 Jan 2006, at 19:22, Werner Guttmann wrote:
there's actually a Jira issue, but I am not sure whether I am excited
about adding this feature. The folks who designed Java must have
distinguished between public and private access by thought, and I
am not
sure whether enabling access to something that has been designed by
contract is the right way to go. I know that that feature has been
added
to Java, but I'd still want to respect the design of a public
interface
(read contract) when somebody apparently put some thoughts into this.
The question, of course, is whether or not API designed to allow
objects to be read in/out from the database, or serialized into/out
of XML formats, is the intended public API contract when an object is
designed.
Perhaps in the case of value objects for whom the API exists for this
purpose, but I would instead argue that business objects get their
API contracts from the needs of the developer APIs and the intentions
for their use within code, but in the case of serialization and JDO,
the mapping file *is* the intended contract for the purposes of
serialization and deserialization of the object.
I'd argue that allowing access to protected would be a good neutral
stand. :) Even better would be doing the same thing for private/
protected API, so that API used solely for serialization/
deserialization can be kept internal to an object, without having to
include access to raw data as parts of public contracts.
-------------------------------------------------
If you wish to unsubscribe from this list, please
send an empty message to the following address:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-------------------------------------------------
