Remove redundant modifiers from fields within interfaces

[markiewb]

Reported by https://netbeans.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=184673#c5

• ‘public’ and/or ‘static’ on nested classes.

[jglick]

public, static, and/or final on fields in an interface are also redundant.

[markiewb]

@jglick ‘public’ and/or ‘static’ on nested classes.: Are you sure about public?

[jglick]

Yup, anything inside an interface is implicitly public, even fields and nested classes. I found this out the hard way years ago in org/openide/windows/InputOutput.java, when browsing Javadoc I saw to my alarm that what were intended to be implementation internals were in fact public. Better IMHO to warn people about this when they are first writing the code, so that they can decide consciously whether to add the public keyword or move the member elsewhere.

[markiewb]

So it would be better to create an errorhint when there is no public
modifier? This way the user will be notified that he exports the nested
class. He can make it public or can move the nested class.

BTW 90% guess there is already such a hint in findbugs
Am 09.12.2013 17:14 schrieb "Jesse Glick" notifications@github.com:

Yup, anything inside an interface is implicitly public, even fields and
nested classes. I found this out the hard way years ago in
org/openide/windows/InputOutput.java, when browsing Javadoc I saw to my
alarm that what were intended to be implementation internals were in fact
public. Better IMHO to warn people about this when they are first writing
the code, so that they can decide consciously whether to add the publickeyword or move the member elsewhere.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/24#issuecomment-30145218
.

[jglick]

So it would be better to create an errorhint when there is no public modifier?

Maybe, but my thought was that having a hint to remove such modifiers as redundant would suffice to drill it into programmers’ minds that it is implicit. Like you until now, I had no idea that the Java compiler would add an implicit public to a nested class, but after being alerted to this, I now think about it when writing code. I suppose it could go either way.

[markiewb]

@jglick : Cannot fix the request because of a probable NetBeans bug.
-> isolated into separate issue - #26 Have a look at it if you are interested

[markiewb]

Note for myself: Need to merge b25ab47

[markiewb]

Already merged. Closing. 1.2