groovy-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jochen Theodorou <blackd...@gmx.org>
Subject Re: Pull request to make private methods static when they are plain functions
Date Thu, 28 Apr 2016 10:10:11 GMT
If a method is so big, that you can no longer see if a local 
variable/parameter is changed or not, then the method needs refactoring, 
not the variables a modifier. So I see no need for adding this, unless 
you want to express something by this.

bye Jochen

On 28.04.2016 02:11, John Wagenleitner wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, Apr 24, 2016 at 11:13 PM, Mario Garcia <mario.ggar@gmail.com
> <mailto:mario.ggar@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     +1
>
>     Besides, I was wondering If most, if not all these static methods,
>     should have all parameters marked as final. Is there any policy
>     about this ? Would it help ?
>
>
>
> I don't think there's a policy, personally I tend to not use final for
> local/parameters unless it's used in an anonymous inner class.
> Hopefully the methods are short enough that the extra syntax is not
> needed to know if it reassigned or not.
>
>
>     2016-04-24 21:46 GMT+02:00 Jochen Theodorou <blackdrag@gmx.org
>     <mailto:blackdrag@gmx.org>>:
>
>         On 24.04.2016 18 <tel:24.04.2016%2018>:12, John Wagenleitner wrote:
>
>             About to merge in PR 290 [1] and wanted to do a quick poll
>             to see if
>             there were any objections since it touches quite a few files
>             across core
>             and sub-modules.  Any objections to merging this into
>             master?  And
>             GROOVY_2_4_X?
>
>             [1] https://github.com/apache/groovy/pull/290
>
>
>         I guess it is ok. I did see two package private methods made
>         private instead of only private ones, but even those should be
>         ok. so unless I did oversee something I do not really have any
>         objection here.
>
>         bye Jochen
>
>
>


Mime
View raw message