Paul Fisher wrote:
>
> "John Keiser" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > No, protected classes *should* be in there.
>
> Non-public classes should not be shown. The JLS and corresponding
> documentation comments (javadoc) specs only cover public classes.
>
> We have no need to see the APIs of Sun's internal classes.
>
"That's what you think" :)
Seriously, this is the same sort of issue we ran up against with motif -
there, *everything* in the widgets is protected, and completely
undocumented. The only problem is that anyone in the world that's going
to subclass a motif widget is going to use some or all of those
protected, undocumented fields.
At some level, purity of implementation has to give way to the utility
of the implementation. I mean, it'll be nice when classpath works, but
what happens if lots of code out there won't work with it?
xtoph
