Thanks for the clarification, Paul! --blake
On Fri, Sep 27, 2024 at 10:27 PM Paul King <pa...@asert.com.au> wrote: > In terms of generated bytecode, Java and Groovy are the same with the > following exceptions: > * for methods and classes, Groovy defaults to public visibility if you > provide no visibility modifier (that is what Intellij is telling you) > * for fields, Groovy turns a field into a property if there is no > visibility modifier > * Java defaults to package-private visibility, you have to use > @PackagePrivate in Groovy for this rarer case > > In terms of obeying scoping, both Java and Groovy let you get to > private members through reflection in earlier JDKs. Groovy provides > nicer syntax for this when using dynamic mode but you shouldn't rely > on that since it has been essentially turned off for later JDKs. > > Cheers, Paul. > > On Sat, Sep 28, 2024 at 5:04 AM Blake McBride <blake1...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Greetings, > > > > Although I have been using Groovy for years, I have largely been > ignoring scoping as it relates to classes, methods, and fields. It is my > opinion that having private and package-level scoping is critical. > Controlling scope is critical to managing a large project. > > > > The way I've been ignoring the issue is: > > > > 1. I just assume it's the same as Java and treat it that way. > > > > 2. Since my large project (~9,000 classes) is broken down into small > packages, I also control visibility by not cross-accessing packages. > > > > (I understand the field property bit.) > > > > My problem is because of two factors: > > > > 1. The documentation that comes with Groovy is not explicit about this. > > > > 2. My IDE (IntelliJ) grays out "public" trying to tell me it isn't > needed. > > > > So, I'd like to get a clear explanation of scope control for classes, > methods, and fields. > > > > Thanks! > > > > Blake McBride > > > > > > >
