All work

 
5 of 5

CFINTERFACE should reject access modifier on method signatures

Description

Copied from: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/RAILO-3136

Dunno if this is important or not, but ColdFusion - correctly - prohibits one to specify an access modifier on a function signature in an interface. Railo allows it, and ignores it.

The only significant thing here is that under no circumstances should Railo ignore code, which is what it's doing here. Either respect it, or reject it. Don't ignore it.

Very minor issue though.

Environment

None

Details

Assignee

Reporter

Priority

Labels

New Issue warning screen

Before you create a new Issue, please post to the mailing list first https://dev.lucee.org

Once the issue has been verified, one of the Lucee team will ask you to file an issue

Created 1 February 2015 at 16:10
Updated last month

Activity

Adam Cameron 
last month

I can see why private makes no sense, as that’s just implementation detail, but remote? Interested in yer thinking there.

Superficially (and I’m only giving it a moment’s thought/reasoning) I would see “remote” being “public to outside world” (where “public” is “public to the rest of the application”), and I could see how an interface contract might say “you need to provide a mechanism for external calls to be accepted to this”.

Personally I’d probably not enforce that sort of of thing with an interface, but that’s personally, and I don’t think that ought to matter to the semantics of the language, which should be opinion-neutral IMO.

NB: not saying I disagree with you at all. My opinion is hastily formed and loosely held.

Michael Offner 
19 September 2016 at 13:09

it should clearly not ignore invalid access modifiers, but it must be allowed, at least remote to package, private never makes sense.