On 19 June 2016 at 12:44, Jochen Wiedmann <jochen.wiedm...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sun, Jun 19, 2016 at 12:49 PM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Use-only interfaces are much easier to evolve as methods can be added >> without affecting client code. > > That applies (IMO) only, if there is an abstract base class, and users > are actually deriving from that.
By a use-only interface, I mean one that is not implemented by user code. i.e. the code does not derive from the interface, it only uses it to define fields etc. This info is taken from https://wiki.eclipse.org/Evolving_Java-based_APIs#Example_4_-_Adding_an_API_method Users deriving from an abstract base class do not have to change code to implement new methods. But if their class happens to define a method with a name that is subsequently used by the Crypto abstract class, there will be a clash which will require them to recode. > Jochen > > > -- > The next time you hear: "Don't reinvent the wheel!" > > http://www.keystonedevelopment.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/evolution-of-the-wheel-300x85.jpg > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
