Request for review Remove "private" cause in jdk exceptions

Sebastian Sickelmann sebastian.sickelmann at
Fri Aug 26 11:25:17 UTC 2011

Am 26.08.2011 13:05, schrieb Dalibor Topic:
> On 8/26/11 12:59 PM, Sebastian Sickelmann wrote:
>> Am 26.08.2011 08:32, schrieb Peter Jones:
>>> Public fields like RemoteException.detail, ill-advised as they may have been, cannot be removed (would break binary compatibility).
>> Sorry for that. It was more a reflex (remove "evil" public fields) than a real problem with this. Breaking this would breaking binary compatibility but can this be a real show-stopper for not fixing this?
> Breaking binary compatibility is bad, bad, really, really bad.
> cheers,
> dalibor topic
I know that. And it wasn't my intention to break compatibility. I just 
wondered why we doesn't even worry about breaking encapsulation(public 
fields are bad too)? In Applications-development (cannot be compared 
with jdk) you wouldn't even think about it. You would break 
compatibility in the next major release and get rid of the encapsulation 
problem. Maybe you wouldn't even wait for the next major release and fix 
it in an bugfix-release, but the later cannot be an option for the jdk.

-- Sebastian

More information about the core-libs-dev mailing list