I'm not a contributer, but just to mention about putting field at the end of a class definition, I agree.. It tends to jive better with the concept of encapsulation.. Anyone reading the source can see what constructors and public methods (sorted to the top) are available first. They shouldn't have to worry about fields unless they are getting into the guts. Since many OSS projects (not struts) only offer source as their doco, it allows visitors to quickly get up to speed with the API without worrying about the internals. Just my thoughts on this..
James > -----Original Message----- > From: David Graham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2003 10:39 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Struts Coding Standard > > > > > >Another practice I reciently started is placing fields at > the very end > >of a > >class definition, after all methods. It makes comparing the class > >and it's interface. But since struts doesn't use many > interfaces this isn't > >a must > >for me. > > > >-Rob > > That's certainly not a common practice and would confuse most Java > developers looking for the member variables. > > Dave > > _________________________________________________________________ > Help STOP SPAM: Try the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* > http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail > > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > <mailto:struts-dev-> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For > additional commands, > e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
