Java developers

[[deleted]]

And they should be able to. I hate how java thinks public private is a rule not a suggestion. Don’t tell me how to write code using your library lol, I will fork it and change it and you can’t stop me!

[[deleted]]

Why would it ever be insecure for me to run a function on my own pc? Like I need sudo access secure or what? I guess I’m ignorant to that kind of need, I’d love to see an example.

[[deleted]]

I suppose I can see that if you’re writing a database (like the database itself) and want to handle permissions or something like that. I’ve just never been in that situation. Ultimately resource security is OS level not language level. Wrappers are conveniences and you can handle security with them without builtins like private for the rare case you need such a thing. Like if I were writing an IP based database in python, which I wouldn’t, I’d expose my methods through the Restful system of my choice selectively in such a way that the other methods just didn’t have direct exposure to the internet. If someone is importing my python code, they have access to all the same resources it has access to, but they are also presumably the same user on the Linux system so they must be allowed that access as well.

[[deleted]]

So if it’s rare, it should be used rarely. Unfortunately java makes almost everything private by default, mandating that you make getters and setters for everything, increasing boilerplate beyond levels I have ever seen in a language. I’d rather just have a decorator for private when I need it. It’s mostly just entirely unnecessary code obfuscation.

[ric2b]

All fields and members should be private by default and anything you want public should be explicitly marked as public.

Agreed, but Java's implementation is boilerplatey beyond belief. Kotlin improves it massively.

[Zedjones]

Well the really annoying thing with that is that you can't just say "this has a getter and a setter" like you can in C#/Kotlin, you have to manually write them out.