Talk:Java package

Package mechanism is not unique for the Java language - could this be made clear in some way? Membla 18:10, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I dont think the deletion decision here Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Packages in Java was very fair since there were 3 keeps and 3 deletes and it was claimed that there was 2k - 5d. I have removed the list section of the article, so it means there is something to go to wikibooks for the extra info. If it deserves a wikibook article, it should have an article here, at least a shorter version which points to the wikibook article. Astrokey44 08:13, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. The discussion for deletion involves some uninformed opinion. Yes, the article shouldn't be a programmer's reference but just because it might look technical doesn't mean it's 'of interest to nobody but Java developers' or its purpose is to teach people Java. The package system is an integral part of the Java programming language and deserves the attention called for because Java is important and therefore its bases are of interest. I think some people in the deletion / merge discussion are confusing the package system with the Java API(s). Java APIs use the package system, they're not the package system. Any discussion of any Java APIs would be incomplete without mention of the package system and the most efficient way to do that is with a link back to this article. Al001 02:31, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This page could do with some information on creating package specification files for Javadoc.

Packages aren't functionally hierarchical - see Apparent Hierarchies of Packages in http://java.sun.com/docs/books/tutorial/java/package/usepkgs.html . Stating that they are hierarchical will promote the common Java antipattern of breaking classes into fine-grained hierarchies of packages. They are more self-contained functional units of code. 208.125.4.90 01:31, 15 March 2007 (UTC)jef[reply]

Broken Links

All of the links under References are broken, caused by Oracle's acquisition of Sun (and thus Java, and thus the Java Docs). --IsmAvatar (talk) 08:11, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Section 7.7 Ambiguous

Package naming conventions says the following:

7.7 of the Java Language Specification

Currently, there are 2 Java Language Specifications. The older one, Java SE 5, has a section 7.7 Unique Package Names. The newer one, Java SE 7, has no section 7.7 (only 7.6). Obviously this section has either moved or been rewritten. After a brief search, I did find "Unique Package Names" under 6.1, Example 1, but that was only an example, so I'm not sure if that's where it moved to. --IsmAvatar (talk) 08:18, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've repaired the link by pointing it to the identical section for JE6 (seen here). Additionally, the naming schema as seen in SE6's specifications is present in SE8's specifications although it is not directly linkable and somewhat hidden. You can view it either by clicking this link and scrolling up or by looking at Section 6.1 - Declarations and scrolling down to the end of the section. Both will bring you to the same destination. Interference 541 (talk) 20:29, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]