Make the fields in Client and Server protected instead of private

[GoogleCodeExporter]

All class fields in both Client and Server classes are private, which prevents 
the classes to be extended in many ways. For example I need to determine 
whether a given server is started or not. I can't, there is no isConnected() 
method in the Server.

So I thought, no problem, I'll just extend it. Can't either. All fields are 
private, so I can't access the shutdown field which tracks exactly that in the 
Server class. 

Instead of private, all fields should be protected so developers can tweak 
things without messing around with the original source code (which gets 
replaced when a new version comes out). :)

Thanks!
Eduardo

Original issue reported on code.google.com by nosacha...@gmail.com on 28 Dec 2011 at 6:21

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Hello dear Eduardo. Making all private fields as protected in general is a bad 
idea, because this makes developers to maintain all these fields in all 
versions. Let us care about them and do not request doing this :). If they will 
not maintain them you still can't use them, as far as they may change from 
version to version.

Such types of problems usually resolved in two ways:
1. if you know there is an information about a state of object what will not 
change from version to version by meaning (your example with state of thread) 
and it's ok to show this information to public - this is a good candidate to 
feature request and extending the class API. 
2. if you need to extend functionality without accessing hidden state - 
decorate the class without subclassing. Your sample problem can be resulved in 
this way as well.

Thanks :).

Original comment by yury.suk...@gmail.com on 21 Feb 2012 at 7:37

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Oh yeah absolutely. I know all your points are valid, my only request to 
actually making them protected would be for me to extend the class' API myself, 
but if you would be willing to extend it permanently that would be ideal. All I 
needed really is a isConnected method. Right now in order to determine this 
without reflection (which is bad since it my break from version to version) I 
have to check whether the ports I have configured are currently in use or not, 
which is really a hack.

I'll enter a request for the API extensions I have in mind (not many really) 
and we can go from there, what do you think?

Thanks!
Eduardo

Original comment by nosacha...@gmail.com on 23 Feb 2012 at 6:29

[GoogleCodeExporter]

What is the exact need in the API? Server#isConnected wouldn't be a good method 
name, as it would be confusing with Connection#isConnected and wouldn't apply 
to Client. Do you want an isRunning() method that would return true if the 
update thread is running? Typical KryoNet usage starts the server or client and 
doesn't stop it again. It is fine to leave it running even if the server or 
client are closed and bound again (Server#bind) or reconnected 
(Client#connect). If you do need to track the state of the update thread, you 
could set a boolean when you start/stop it.

Original comment by nathan.s...@gmail.com on 26 Apr 2012 at 3:07

• Changed state: WontFix