Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-jakarta-avalon-dev-archive@apache.org Received: (qmail 38682 invoked from network); 24 Jun 2002 12:00:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nagoya.betaversion.org) (192.18.49.131) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 24 Jun 2002 12:00:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 17682 invoked by uid 97); 24 Jun 2002 12:00:40 -0000 Delivered-To: qmlist-jakarta-archive-avalon-dev@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 17666 invoked by uid 97); 24 Jun 2002 12:00:39 -0000 Mailing-List: contact avalon-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Help: List-Post: List-Id: "Avalon Developers List" Reply-To: "Avalon Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list avalon-dev@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 17654 invoked by uid 98); 24 Jun 2002 12:00:38 -0000 X-Antivirus: nagoya (v4198 created Apr 24 2002) Subject: tweety design [Re: What is Avalon?] From: Leo Simons To: Avalon Development In-Reply-To: <3D16F539.3090002@apache.org> References: <000301c21b60$bbdb3170$0801a8c0@Lagrange> <1024911747.2008.37.camel@lsd.bdv51> <3D16F539.3090002@apache.org> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.0.5 Date: 24 Jun 2002 14:00:29 +0200 Message-Id: <1024920029.14180.10.camel@lsd.bdv51> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N > Leo Simons wrote: > >>I have taken steps to improve our branding and marketing, and > >>I hope I can get you and the rest into a discussion regarding > >>this: > > > > > > > > > > not necessary =) I agree with it. Now to do the coding... > > :-D > > Which brings me to the changes you've done to tweety. > > IMHO making tweety a component itself makes it a microcontainer, not an > educational thing. hmm. Don't think so... it now is a) example of a well-designed (sort of) component b) source code that is still easy enough to follow for the programmers the avalon system targets (ie, look at what main() does, then look at the functions called from main(). Standard way to dissect a simple program) c) no more difficult to use from the commandline d) no more difficult to explain (conceptually) in educational documentation to potential users which ones do you disagree with? > I did not do it on putpose, because I think that this conceptual > overloading is confusing, ie a container that can be contained but is a > starting point. you might be right there. Should be easy enough to not explain. Looking at 90% of programming books, a class that contains a main() method often instantiates itself as one of the first things in that method. I think this is such a common pattern in programming that we should use it as well. > I would focus on putting this in microcontainer and keeping tweety as > a simple container-runner that must work from commandline, and make > microcontainer the first real simple container. we could do this. It would put additional requirments on microcontainer. The problem I see is that then tweety in itself would be an example of how not to write software =) cheers, - Leo, still archiving the discussion... -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: For additional commands, e-mail: