My unterstanding of crypto is that those interfaces are not to be implemented by Clients.
sebb <seb...@gmail.com> schrieb am So., 19. Juni 2016 um 14:02: > 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 > >
