On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 7:21 PM, Emmanuel Lécharny <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
Not that much, but as the classes are immutable, I was thinking that it's not really necessary to have them not final.
On 3/21/11 5:43 PM, Alex Karasulu wrote:
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 6:39 PM, Emmanuel Lecharny<email@example.com>wrote:
I'd avoid this because it would limit extension. Are we gaining a lot by
do you think it's a good idea to make the Dn, Rdn and Ava classes final ?
making them final?
Immutability and extension are orthogonal concerns. You can still have immutability in the base class, extend the class and add more fields that are needed for some aspect of handling like we did for example with these decorators in the codec for the req/resp classes.
Hence for the sake of the core properties they're still immutable but extension may be an option left for users allowing the use of the class in various scenarios we cannot think of in advance.
Also it might be faster (inline methods, etc)
Property accessor/mutators can be declared final but optimizations should occur anyway, of course this is JVM dependent but I'd pass on small optimization gains for now.
Just wanted to hear other's opinion here.
I appreciate that.