ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Peter Seibel" <>
Subject RE: Stronger JLS Adherence
Date Wed, 29 Nov 2000 17:09:29 GMT
Hi, I'm a new subscriber--funny that the first thing that'd make me
delurk (and a few days late) has nothing to do with Ant per se.
So I hope it isn't presumptuous of me to say:


I'm not sure this is "Stronger JLS Adherence" so much as "Stronger
Jikes Suggested Style Adherence". While it's true that the public
modifier on interface members is redundant I don't recall anything in
the JLS "strongly discouraging" it. (The only style guidelines that I
remember being in the JLS are the Naming Conventions given in Section
6.8 and a suggested order for modifers given in secs. 8.3.1 and

As a practical matter, as a fallible programmer I prefer to have the
public modifier on methods in an interface: that way you can cut and
paste the method signatures from the interface into a class that's
going to implement the interface and not have to go in add add the
(now required) public modifier to all the methods. Less typing and
less opportunity for mistakes. I love jikes for its pedantry but I
think this warning is not about pedantry but about a personal
stylistic foible of the Jikes authors. I don't care about leaving the
'final static' off constants since you don't have to reuse the
signature anywhere.

This is obvious not a huge big deal, but all these little things add


P.S. If someone can show me that this recommendation actually comes
from the JLS then I'll have to consider whether I'd rather turn in my
Pedant First Class badge or my Pragmatic Programmer card. Hope that
doesn't happen. ;-)

-----Original Message-----
From: Peter Donald []
Sent: Saturday, November 25, 2000 5:53 PM
Subject: Re: Stronger JLS Adherence

At 07:29  24/11/00 -0800, you wrote:
>--- Peter Donald <> wrote:
>> Hi,
>> Would it be possible for me to update Ant source to be more compliant
>> with
>> JLS. Essentially this involves removing public/static/final modifiers
>> from
>> methods/variables defined in interfaces.
>> Example error is ...
>>     [javac]
>> 74:5: Warning: The use of the "public" modifier in this context is
>> redundant and strongly discouraged as a matter of style.
>Isn't jikes amazing???
>+1, although I'm guilty of declaring interface methods as public out of
>pure habit... I'll have to fix that (thanks for the hint).
>I thought any variables declared in interfaces *had* to be declared "static

Variables in interfaces are automatically public + final + static and the
compiler knows this and thus does not need the possibly fallable
programmers to tell them this ;)

So if any specifiers are given they have to be public final static or else
none ;)



| Despite your efforts to be a romantic hero, you will |
| gradually evolve into a postmodern plot device.      |

View raw message