Regards,
Anayonkar Shivalkar (SCJP, SCWCD, OCMJD, OCEEJBD)
Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
Regards,
Anayonkar Shivalkar (SCJP, SCWCD, OCMJD, OCEEJBD)
Anayonkar Shivalkar wrote:The problem I'm having is - since the code is stable (and I want to change it as less as possible) - I'm not following the access-modifier approach like keeping methods as private or default (or creating facades for each publicly exposed method).
"Leadership is nature's way of removing morons from the productive flow" - Dogbert
Articles by Winston can be found here
Regards,
Anayonkar Shivalkar (SCJP, SCWCD, OCMJD, OCEEJBD)
Winston Gutkowski wrote:Personally, I think I'd bite the bullet and release a refactored version that is implemented properly - however, I suspect that Joel Spolsky might not agree with me.
Anayonkar Shivalkar wrote:I agree with Joel Spolsky - my code is anyway working - on lot of machines, and for quite long time - so I wouldn't give it much though to write it from scratch
"Leadership is nature's way of removing morons from the productive flow" - Dogbert
Articles by Winston can be found here
'client' here is just another team (not customer)
Winston Gutkowski wrote:Would you have to write it "from scratch" though? It seems to me that you could produce a refactored version that reuses all the code you've already written, but just hides it from your clients - wrappers are wonderful things.
Ulf Dittmer wrote:So they're part of your company? If so, can't you provide them with documentation that makes it clear how the library is and is not supposed to be used, and expect them to follow that?
if your jar exposes 5 methods, it means we can use 5 methods; if you want us to use 3 methods, then expose only 3 methods
Regards,
Anayonkar Shivalkar (SCJP, SCWCD, OCMJD, OCEEJBD)
if I employ use of SecurityManager, will there be any performance impact? I don't think so - because default SecurityManager is anyway used by JVM - but would like to get expert viewpoint on this.
Anayonkar Shivalkar wrote:but as I mentioned, the idea is to make minimal changes to code...
"Leadership is nature's way of removing morons from the productive flow" - Dogbert
Articles by Winston can be found here
William Brogden wrote:Well, if you made the class you don't want people to directly use an abstract class, would that satisfy your requirement?
Regards,
Anayonkar Shivalkar (SCJP, SCWCD, OCMJD, OCEEJBD)
Anayonkar Shivalkar wrote:When a user has access to my jar, it has access to all public classes, public method etc. So I doubt if abstract class will help here.
"Leadership is nature's way of removing morons from the productive flow" - Dogbert
Articles by Winston can be found here