Re: japi and public references to non-public types

[Mark Wielaard]

Hi,

On Tue, 2005-10-04 at 13:05 -0400, Stuart Ballard wrote:
> I'm wondering if it
> would be better for Japitools to catch this kind of situation and
> treat the "impl" field as if it's package-private itself - that is,
> ignore it entirely since japi only deals with public and protected
> members.
>
> I can't think of any reasons why any such field (or a method taking a
> non-public type as a parameter or returning one) should ever matter in
> practice for compatibility, but I'd like to see if other people feel
> the same way before trying to implement skipping them. 

This looks like something the compiler should warn against
"public/protected field/return with package/private type"
(inner classes could be private).

Tom are you taking notes for gcjx?

I think japi should also warn against it not hide it, except when
explicitly told to.

Cheers,

Mark

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part