Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add a check for explicit package local members. #5

Open
GoogleCodeExporter opened this issue Oct 9, 2015 · 0 comments
Open

Add a check for explicit package local members. #5

GoogleCodeExporter opened this issue Oct 9, 2015 · 0 comments

Comments

@GoogleCodeExporter
Copy link

If you read concrete classes its not always clear whether a member is
delibrately package local or left unspecified.

Members left unspecified can often be made private or even deleted
(checking for unused private members is simpler than unused package local
members)

Some members can appear that private is okay, however for performance
reasons may have been delibrately made package local. e.g. a member which
is accessed by an inner class can perform better if package local rather
than private (due to the use of accessor methods)

To address this I suggest a @package_local annotation to signify that a
member is explicity package local.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by [email protected] on 27 Jan 2009 at 5:06

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant