Posted by
Michael Schmid on
Jul 13, 2015; 3:09pm
URL: http://imagej.273.s1.nabble.com/about-ImageJ-extensibility-tp5013530p5013534.html
On Jul 13, 2015, at 09:55, Airen ZaldÃvar Peraza wrote:
> Dear ImageJ developers, I would like to request for future versions of
> ImageJ that you replace private and package methods, if possible, for
> protected methods. This way inheritance would be much more easy. We have
> extended ImageJ creating our own ImageCanvas, ImageWindow, etc and we are
> very happy with the results, since we can use zoom, move, filters, etc,
> with very little customization. Only that sometimes we cannot reuse code
> because of the visibility of the parent attributes and/or methods. Code
> sometimes is not very extensible.
> Best regards Airen
Hi Airen,
in my view it is not so simple to declare all 'internal' methods and variables protected: When changing the code (for bug fixes or improvements), some methods and class variables may disappear or do something different.
If you suggest a few methods that you want protected instead of private, and they are nothing that may change in the foreseeable future, Wayne might do it (of course, I can't speak for him).
So far my 3 cents,
Michael
--
ImageJ mailing list:
http://imagej.nih.gov/ij/list.html