tapestry-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ulrich Stärk <...@spielviel.de>
Subject Re: @Override on interface methods
Date Wed, 27 Jun 2012 21:16:03 GMT
On 27.06.2012 21:13, Kalle Korhonen wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 10:41 AM, Howard Lewis Ship <hlship@gmail.com> wrote:
>> What's our concensus on using @Override on methods declared by an
>> implemented interface?
>> I'm switching between JDKs & code bases so much my head is spinning.
>> I like @Override in JDK 1.6 mode: present for methods of implemented
>> interfaces.
>> I bet there's a way to get IDEA to annotate existing methods that don't
>> have @Override.
> It comes down to the jdk version we want to support. I like using
> @Override on interface methods as well. Source and binary versions
> don't necessarily need to be the the same but that just adds
> complexity on so many levels. We had an earlier discussion on jdk
> versions but we left it open. My practical opinion is we'd just
> require jdk 1.6 for 5.4 and be done with it. We may need to take a
> vote if can't reach a consensus otherwise.

Really? Switch JDK versions because of @Override? I stated my concerns about ditching JDK
support without need before. I just would not do it if we don't gain any significant benefit.

I personally don't like the use of @Override on mere method implementations. The naming (and
the JavaDocs) imply that methods supposed to override superclass methods are to be annotated
it. Overriding is replacing an /existing/ implementation in a superclass or parent class with
different one. With interface implementations or implementations of abstract methods there
simply is
nothing to be overriden and the annotation would be ambiguous IMO.


To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org

View raw message