I've renamed the methods and moved most of them into the caller classes. It seems a shame to move verifyNotNull(), though, because it is used in so many places ... ?
I can't make it package-private because it is used in collections..concurrent On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 20:11, Todd Volkert <[email protected]> wrote: >> - I would prefer to see the methods named "validateXXX()" or "verifyXXX()". >> > > +1 - I like these names better. > > >> >> - I would prefer to see them defined within the classes that call them, >> rather than delegating to a separate CollectionArgChecks class. Even if it >> introduces a bit of redundancy, I think the encapsulation offered by this >> approach is preferable. >> > > I personally don't actually mind the separate class in this case, but I > think it should be package private. >
