Do as you wish, I will no longer bug you.
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-commons.680414.n4.nabble.com/JEXL-New-non-private-mutable-fields-tp4127864p4128952.html
Sent from the Commons - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com
t; Your call.
I expect other users will lose interest if the API breaks frequently.
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://apache-commons.680414.n4.nabble.com/JEXL-New-non-private-mutable-fields-tp4127864p4128789.html
> Sent from the Commons - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com
On 1 December 2011 14:15, henrib wrote:
(BTW, please quote some context (as I do here) when replying.
Otherwise it becomes rather difficult to follow the thread.)
> I don't think the JexlEngine mutable fields should be made volatile. Same as
> JexlArithmetic btw.
>
> The intent is not to change
ome sort for scripting; I
will definitely loose interest in it if it has to become a "closed" library.
Your call.
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-commons.680414.n4.nabble.com/JEXL-New-non-private-mutable-fields-tp4127864p4128789.html
Sent from the Commons
ep of the JexlEngine initialization code before expression creation &
evaluation.
And may be add:
Changing them after initialization may result in undefined behavior.
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-commons.680414.n4.nabble.com/JEXL-New-non-private-mutable-fields-tp4127864p4128517.ht
ttp://apache-commons.680414.n4.nabble.com/JEXL-New-non-private-mutable-fields-tp4127864p4128334.html
> Sent from the Commons - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@
Fair enough; do you make the change or do I make the change ?
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-commons.680414.n4.nabble.com/JEXL-New-non-private-mutable-fields-tp4127864p4128334.html
Sent from the Commons - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com
On 1 December 2011 12:50, henrib wrote:
> Both 'parameters' and 'cancelled' are protected so they can be used by
> derived classes easily; having a private field + protected setter and getter
> is clutter in this specific case.
The problem with mutable non-private fields is that they are non-OO;
rrays are parallel.
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-commons.680414.n4.nabble.com/JEXL-New-non-private-mutable-fields-tp4127864p4128191.html
Sent from the Commons - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
-
To uns
Clirr reports that there are some new mutable non-private fields.
Mutable fields should be private, and only updated through a setter method.
Can the following be made private?
They don't appear to be used externally.
INFO: 6000: org.apache.commons.jexl2.Interpreter: Added protected
field cancel
10 matches
Mail list logo