hmm, didn't find mention of "this" usage in this doc
maybe i was not clear so trying to be a bit more: updating code to use "final" is IMO a nice update. The update i don't get is why replacing "foo()" by "this.foo()". If the call is ambiguous it is a bad practice and if it is not it makes code a bit less readable IMO wdyt? Romain Manni-Bucau Twitter: @rmannibucau Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/ LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau 2012/12/11 AndyG <andy.gumbre...@orprovision.com>: > Here is a really good write up that I subscribe to that in addition to the > 'Final fields' section has some really good links to other 'field' related > resources. > > http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/java/library/j-jtp1029/index.html > > I have also based my use of final fields on the exposure of literally > hundreds of bugs discovered over many years. You may be surprised to see how > many subtle (yet extremely difficult to find) threading issues can be > resolved by using final fields. > > If I have my way I would prefer a 'mutable' keyword, with the default being > 'immutable' (final) ;-). > > The JIT compiler also offers optimizations on final fields over mutable > ones. > > Andy. > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://openejb.979440.n4.nabble.com/Fwd-svn-commit-r1420061-in-openejb-trunk-openejb-container-openejb-core-src-main-java-org-apache-opea-tp4659400p4659402.html > Sent from the OpenEJB Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
