Re: Bug fix in java.lang.Boolean

[John Keiser]

On 14 Jul 2001 18:31:05 -0600, Tom Tromey wrote:
> >>>>> "John" == John Keiser <address@hidden> writes:
> 
> John> Perhaps I haven't fully understood the conversation (it
> John> happens), but I have not seen an objection to changing Boolean
> John> as proposed and I personally think that it is nicer and more
> John> self-documenting if the field is final.  Does anyone have
> John> objections to doing this and changing the other immutable
> John> java.lang objects as well?
> 
> I think unless and until Sun says one way or another what is right,
> the change ought to go in.  It seems sensible enough to me.
> 
> John> With regards changing reflection, let me see if I understand the
> John> proposal: you'd like to change some of the fields in Class,
> John> Field, Method, etc. to be final so that people couldn't screw
> John> with the objects in illegal ways.  Again, I don't understand why
> John> we *shouldn't* make this change.
> 
> Sounds good.
> 

And yes, FYI, that means I'm volunteering to check this in, along with
the doc changes, as soon as I figure out my CVS access again (new
computer, no Kerberos).  I'll test some of the doc changes to make sure
we actually conform to the docs we want to put in :)

--John