Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #2980
| From | Owen Jacobson <angrybaldguy@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.java.programmer |
| Message-ID | <2011040801014026003-angrybaldguy@gmailcom> (permalink) |
| References | <25875c94-9af2-4d28-976d-2050a738ae2e@n10g2000yqf.googlegroups.com> <4sOdneh7k40lDgPQnZ2dnUVZ_vSdnZ2d@earthlink.com> |
| Subject | Re: Why only public methods on interfaces? |
| Date | 2011-04-08 01:01 -0400 |
On 2011-04-08 00:49:02 -0400, Patricia Shanahan said:
> On 4/7/2011 5:09 PM, kramer31 wrote:
>> Could someone please explain to me the rational behind only allowing
>> public methods on interfaces? In my mind, protection and interfaces
>> are two independent if perhaps somewhat related concepts.
>
> I think the original Java design underestimated the extreme usefulness
> of Java interfaces. At the time one of their uses, representing the
> public face of a package, was assumed to be the only possible use.
>
> I've wanted to use intra-package interfaces, containing only default
> access methods. There is an unpleasant choice between making something
> that should be an interface into an abstract class or having public
> methods that are supposed to only be used within one package.
As Stefan pointed out, interfaces themselves don't have to be public.
This is legal:
package com.example;
interface SomeInternalAbstraction {
public void flog(Horse horse);
}
-o
Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
Why only public methods on interfaces? kramer31 <kramer.newsreader@gmail.com> - 2011-04-07 17:09 -0700
Re: Why only public methods on interfaces? Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-04-07 21:48 -0300
Re: Why only public methods on interfaces? Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-04-07 21:01 -0400
Re: Why only public methods on interfaces? v_borchert@despammed.com (Volker Borchert) - 2011-04-08 02:43 +0000
Re: Why only public methods on interfaces? Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-04-08 00:24 -0400
Re: Why only public methods on interfaces? Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-04-07 21:49 -0700
Re: Why only public methods on interfaces? Owen Jacobson <angrybaldguy@gmail.com> - 2011-04-08 01:01 -0400
Re: Why only public methods on interfaces? Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-04-07 22:37 -0700
Re: Why only public methods on interfaces? Peter Duniho <NpOeStPeAdM@NnOwSlPiAnMk.com> - 2011-04-08 00:14 -0700
Re: Why only public methods on interfaces? Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-04-08 06:59 -0700
Re: Why only public methods on interfaces? Peter Duniho <NpOeStPeAdM@NnOwSlPiAnMk.com> - 2011-04-08 07:17 -0700
Re: Why only public methods on interfaces? Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-04-08 08:59 -0700
Re: Why only public methods on interfaces? Peter Duniho <NpOeStPeAdM@NnOwSlPiAnMk.com> - 2011-04-08 17:27 -0700
Re: Why only public methods on interfaces? "Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-09 22:14 -0700
Re: Why only public methods on interfaces? "Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-09 22:28 -0700
Re: Why only public methods on interfaces? Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-04-10 16:02 +0100
Re: Why only public methods on interfaces? Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2011-04-08 03:18 -0700
Re: Why only public methods on interfaces? Esmond Pitt <esmond.pitt@bigpond.com> - 2011-04-08 20:32 +1000
Re: Why only public methods on interfaces? Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-04-08 20:34 +0100
Re: Why only public methods on interfaces? Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-04-10 18:10 +0100
csiph-web