[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GROOVY-7574?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14954809#comment-14954809
]
Paul King commented on GROOVY-7574:
-----------------------------------
I think the "USE WITH CAUTION" comments could just be a better targeted
"Caution: ". Currently it isn't clear if that applies to all use cases or just
specific ones (e.g. when reverse is supplied).
Also, is the "(expensive)" comment accurate? Perhaps "(possibly expensive)" or
"(involves additional overhead)"?
> Range members should be final
> -----------------------------
>
> Key: GROOVY-7574
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GROOVY-7574
> Project: Groovy
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: groovy-runtime
> Reporter: Thibault Kruse
> Priority: Minor
>
> The implementations of Range groovy.lang.ObjectRange and groovy.lang.IntRange
> have private members that are not final. This means that they can be modified
> via Groovy. However, if modified both implementations can easily be brought
> into inconsistent state, as they were implemented in Java under the
> assumption that private members cannot change.
> I suggest making the members final, such that instances of the range classes
> become immutable.
> EDIT: See https://github.com/apache/incubator-groovy/pull/109
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
