commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From sebb <>
Subject Re: [JEXL] New non-private mutable fields
Date Thu, 01 Dec 2011 15:18:55 GMT
On 1 December 2011 15:01, henrib <> wrote:
> After more thoughts on the matter, I tried to be attractive to pragmatic

Sorry, what matter?

> coder with JEXL which is antagonist to the more rigorous approach you want
> to impose.

I'm just being cautious, see below.

> As a user of some other libraries, I find bothersome not being able to
> derive classes because all methods/fields are private and/or final when
> there is no "obvious" reason. Which also means I accept the price of this
> freedom which is to follow releases / maintain my code when necessary. Thus,
> my tendency to privilege 'protected' fields or methods.

There are a lot of users of Commons code who just want to be able to
drop in a replacement jar when updates are released.

As I already wrote, it's really easy to release a new version with
fewer restrictions as that does not affect binary compatibility.

The reverse is not the case, and generally requires major upheaval.

> My goal with JEXL was  allowing a "playground" of some sort for scripting; I
> will definitely loose interest in it if it has to become a "closed" library.
> Your call.

I expect other users will lose interest if the API breaks frequently.

> --
> View this message in context:
> Sent from the Commons - Dev mailing list archive at
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message