commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Henri Yandell <>
Subject Re: [io][vote] FileUtils: decision on style
Date Tue, 29 Jul 2003 18:44:55 GMT

As to the final, I've been pondering that too. It didn't go in the guide
itself, but we've been treating it as such when we write Utils in Lang.

The public constructor is so that applications without a concept of static
[velocity? beanshell?] can happily interact with the utils. I'll attempt
to hunt down why the final is avoided.


On Tue, 29 Jul 2003, Berin Loritsch wrote:

> Arun Thomas wrote:
> > Can someone expound on this "lesson"?  The Developers Guide mentions neither the
rule that "final" should be avoided, nor the rule that a public constructor is required. 
I'd love to know the reasoning - is there some reason that actually derives from the constraints
of lang, or is it due to constraints on how other systems use lang?  I'm particularly confounded
by why the use of final would be a problem.
> >
> In my recollection, it has to do with allowing the classes to be used in
> scripting environments.  Some Java bindings require "bean" semantics to
> work properly.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

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

View raw message