Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #2980

Re: Why only public methods on interfaces?

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

Show all headers | View raw


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 | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar


Thread

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