All members in JexlEngine are protected so JexlEngine can be derived easily.
As for the functors map, there is no reason to allocate that map before hand if the expression does not use any; there will likely be far more exprs evaluated without namespaces than the opposite. There are only 2 occurrences of null checking for functors and these are located in the same function. I dont feel like I'm bending proper coding rules here. Btw, any news on the bsf3 artefact in the repository ? sebb-2-2 wrote: > > ... >> protected final JexlArithmetic arithmetic; >> /** The map of registered functions. */ >> protected final Map<String, Object> functions; >> + /** The map of registered functions. */ >> + protected Map<String, Object> functors; > > Could/should be private. > > Indeed so should all the other instance variables... > ... >> + this.functors = null; > .... > Why not allocate an empty HashMap here? > > It would save a lot of null checking later, and the variable could > then be final. > -- View this message in context: http://n4.nabble.com/Re-svn-commit-r890409-in-commons-proper-jexl-trunk-src-main-java-org-apache-commons-jexl2-main-java--tp963766p963796.html Sent from the Commons - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
