rspec/rules/S1214/java/rule.adoc
2022-02-04 16:28:24 +00:00

65 lines
1.5 KiB
Plaintext

According to Joshua Bloch, author of "Effective Java":
____
The constant interface pattern is a poor use of interfaces.
That a class uses some constants internally is an implementation detail.
Implementing a constant interface causes this implementation detail to leak into the class's exported API. It is of no consequence to the users of a class that the class implements a constant interface. In fact, it may even confuse them. Worse, it represents a commitment: if in a future release the class is modified so that it no longer needs to use the constants, it still must implement the interface to ensure binary compatibility. If a nonfinal class implements a constant interface,
all of its subclasses will have their namespaces polluted by the constants in the interface.
____
This rule raises an issue when an interface consists solely of fields, without any other members.
== Noncompliant Code Example
[source,java]
----
interface Status { // Noncompliant
int OPEN = 1;
int CLOSED = 2;
}
----
== Compliant Solution
[source,java]
----
public enum Status { // Compliant
OPEN,
CLOSED;
}
----
or
[source,java]
----
public final class Status { // Compliant
public static final int OPEN = 1;
public static final int CLOSED = 2;
}
----
ifdef::env-github,rspecator-view[]
'''
== Implementation Specification
(visible only on this page)
include::message.adoc[]
'''
== Comments And Links
(visible only on this page)
include::comments-and-links.adoc[]
endif::env-github,rspecator-view[]