Kedar Mhaswade's Blog

Community: JDK Archives

Should package-info.java be renamed?

It is suggested that the preferrred way of creating the information for a Java package, such that the javadoc tool recognizes it as such, while creating the javadoc documentation.

I decided to take this advice and immediately landed into problem of inconsistency with it. I could not create this file as a Java source file, using the NetBeans IDE because it is not a proper java class name! So, I wonder why Java SE decided to take such a name. Wouldn't just packageinfo.java serve the purpose?

Am I missing something obvious?

Static Imports -- not a clean job?

We have been requested to use static imports sparingly. I like that advice. Use your judgment to actually use this support.

But frankly, articles, presentations I have seen use the stdout, the "out" field of java.lang.System as imported statically. But, the following program does not compile:

class Format {
public static void main(final String[] args) {
out.format("Hello, World!");
}
}

Why?

Because I did not do: import static java.lang.System.out!

Why are all public members of the System classes not automatically
statically imported, like the System classes are imported?

Is there a problem with this expectation? Would community like implicit static import of public members of java.lang.*?

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.