After more thoughts on the matter, I tried to be attractive to pragmatic coder with JEXL which is antagonist to the more rigorous approach you want to impose. As a user of some other libraries, I find bothersome not being able to derive classes because all methods/fields are private and/or final when there is no "obvious" reason. Which also means I accept the price of this freedom which is to follow releases / maintain my code when necessary. Thus, my tendency to privilege 'protected' fields or methods. My goal with JEXL was allowing a "playground" of some sort for scripting; I will definitely loose interest in it if it has to become a "closed" library. Your call.
-- View this message in context: http://apache-commons.680414.n4.nabble.com/JEXL-New-non-private-mutable-fields-tp4127864p4128789.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
