Re: Public vs internal APIs - Mailing list pgsql-jdbc

From Markus KARG
Subject Re: Public vs internal APIs
Date
Msg-id 002901d0c567$c6f9fe00$54edfa00$@eu
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Public vs internal APIs  (Vladimir Sitnikov <sitnikov.vladimir@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Public vs internal APIs  (Vladimir Sitnikov <sitnikov.vladimir@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-jdbc
Actually I would go with a really flat structure, so we can simply use "default" and "public" visibility of classes to
distinguishbetween API and implementation. If more structure is wanted, we could use "org.postgresql" vs.
"org.postgresql.internal"to make it more clear which classes are private and which are published. 

Unfortunately Java has no "friends" declaration. :-(

-----Original Message-----
From: Vladimir Sitnikov [mailto:sitnikov.vladimir@gmail.com]
Sent: Donnerstag, 23. Juli 2015 18:35
To: Markus KARG
Cc: List
Subject: Re: [JDBC] Public vs internal APIs

> instead restructuring the package hierarchy, as this is was it was invented for originally.

package-private is not enough.
Java9 will have modules for that, however we would have to live with
java8 for a while.

Which package would you suggest for org.postgresql.util.LruCache?

Vladimir



pgsql-jdbc by date:

Previous
From: Vladimir Sitnikov
Date:
Subject: Re: Public vs internal APIs
Next
From: Vladimir Sitnikov
Date:
Subject: Re: Public vs internal APIs