Re: Javadoc misprint for DefaultListSelectionModel

Just a quick comment about your quote...

 > As I think about it though, I'm surprised it even compiles without being
 > declared final static: "The only fields allowed in an interface
 > definition are constants that are declared both static and final" (Java
 > in a Nutshell, 4th ed. p118). It wouldn't surprise me at all if under
 > the covers these variables actually are being compiled as static finals
 > (that's really the only way they make sense in an interface). At any
 > rate...its not a big issue (just interesting ;-)...I'd say go ahead and
 > chnage it.

That is all true, though you should not be surprised that it compiles. 
It compiles just fine because:

"Every field declaration in the body of an interface is implicitly 
public, static, and final. It is permitted to redundantly specify any or 
all of these modifiers for such fields." (Java Language Specification, 
2nd ed. section 9.3)

So apparently if a compiler follows the specification then the concern 
Jake had about memory consumption doesn't apply. I agree, however, that 
for the sake of explicitivity (is that a word?) we should declare them 
public static final.

-shawn

Christian Cryder wrote:
> First of all I agree with you, we should change it.
>  
> As I think about it though, I'm surprised it even compiles without being 
> declared final static: "The only fields allowed in an interface 
> definition are constants that are declared both static and final" (Java 
> in a Nutshell, 4th ed. p118). It wouldn't surprise me at all if under 
> the covers these variables actually are being compiled as static finals 
> (that's really the only way they make sense in an interface). At any 
> rate...its not a big issue (just interesting ;-)...I'd say go ahead and 
> chnage it.
>  
> Regarding nuking code that has been commented out. As a general rule, 
> when I am working on classes I leave the original code in there (albeit 
> commented out) to make it easier to track down problems if they arise - 
> I can see what was there before, how it got changed, etc. This makes 
> sense in classes that get modified with a fair degree of frequency. 
> However, for classes that are either a) undergoing massive rewrites, in 
> which there's really not much comparison between old and new code, or b) 
> haven't changed in a long time, then I think its fine to clean things up 
> from time to time.
>  
> DefaultListSelectionModel falls into b...it hasn't been changed in a 
> long time, I'd wager, so if you want to clean things up a bit, feel free.
>  
> Hope that helps...
> Christian
> 
> ----------------------------------------------
> Christian Cryder [[email protected]]
> Internet Architect, ATMReports.com
> Barracuda - http://barracudamvc.org <http://barracudamvc.org/>
> ----------------------------------------------
> "Coffee? I could quit anytime, just not today"
> 
>     -----Original Message-----
>     *From:* [email protected]
>     [mailto:[email protected]]*On Behalf Of *Jacob Kjome
>     *Sent:* Monday, May 05, 2003 4:22 PM
>     *To:* [email protected]
>     *Subject:* RE: [Barracuda] Javadoc misprint for
>     DefaultListSelectionModel
> 
> 
>     They may be effectively final, but not static.  Currently, each
>     variable would take up more memory space for every
>     ListSelectionModel object that is created unless they are defined as
>     static.  Making them final also allows the compiler to perform
>     optimizations....unless the compiler sees it is an interface and
>     treats everything like static final, but I am not aware of that and
>     It probably wouldn't be required of a java compiler.  No reason I
>     see not to be explicit about it?
> 
>     BTW, there is a *ton* of code commented out in
>     DefaultListSelectionModel.  Is there any particular reason to keep
>     it there?  If we remove it, the original code will continue to exist
>     in CVS, so it isn't like it is lost for good.  If it isn't used and
>     there are no comments saying "please do not delete", then I think it
>     would make sense to just clean it up.  Any objections?
> 
>     Jake
> 
>     At 01:46 PM 5/5/2003 -0400, you wrote:
> 
>>     No objections, but its actually a moot point, since
>>     ListSelectionModel is an interface, so any variables declared
>>     therein effectively are static final (whether they are declared
>>     that way or not).
>>      
>>     Christian
>>     ----------------------------------------------
>>     Christian Cryder [[email protected]]
>>     Internet Architect, ATMReports.com
>>     Barracuda - http://barracudamvc.org <http://barracudamvc.org/>
>>     ----------------------------------------------
>>     "Coffee? I could quit anytime, just not today"
>>
>>         -----Original Message-----
>>         From: [email protected]
>>         [mailto:[email protected]]On Behalf Of Jacob Kjome
>>         Sent: Monday, May 05, 2003 1:23 PM
>>         To: [email protected]
>>         Subject: Re: [Barracuda] Javadoc misprint for
>>         DefaultListSelectionModel
>>
>>
>>         Oh, ok, I thought you were a committer.  I'll make the
>>         change.  BTW, shouldn't SINGLE_SELECTION,
>>         SINGLE_INTERVAL_SELECTION, and MULTIPLE_INTERVAL_SELECTION be
>>         static variables in ListSelectionModel?  They aren't
>>         currently.  I don't see why not?  Actually, they should also
>>         be final.
>>
>>         Any objections to making them static final?
>>
>>         Jake
>>
>>         At 10:57 AM 5/5/2003 -0600, you wrote:
>>
>>>             Yes that's right... I however am not a commiter so I
>>>             don't have access to check in changes to source files.
>>>
>>>             -shawn
>>>
>>>             Jacob Kjome wrote:
>>>
>>>>                 Hi Shawn,
>>>>                 Go ahead and make the change.  It is just a Javadoc
>>>>                 correction, right?
>>>>
>>>>                 Jake
>>>>                 At 10:03 AM 5/5/2003 -0600, you wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>                     Hey guys, just wanted to let someone know that
>>>>>                     there is some incorrect information in the
>>>>>                     javadoc comments for DefaultListSelectionModel.
>>>>>                     Specifically, the comments for
>>>>>                     setSelectionMode() claim "the default it
>>>>>                     MULTIPLE_INTERVAL_SELECTION". However, after
>>>>>                     wondering why my BSelect wasn't working and
>>>>>                     then looking at the source I see that should
>>>>>                     actually say "SINGLE_SELECTION".
>>>>>
>>>>>                     -shawn
>>>>>
>>>>>                     _______________________________________________
>>>>>                     Barracuda mailing list
>>>>>                     [email protected]
>>>>>                     http://barracudamvc.org/lists/listinfo/barracuda
>>>
>>>
>>>             _______________________________________________
>>>             Barracuda mailing list
>>>             [email protected]
>>>             http://barracudamvc.org/lists/listinfo/barracuda