commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Ola Berg" <ola.b...@ports.se>
Subject Re: [lang] scope for version 2
Date Wed, 22 Jan 2003 08:30:44 GMT
On 2003-01-22 at 01:01 Henri Yandell wrote:

> My personal belief is:
> 
> 1) math/time should continue to grow in Lang in development until such a
> point as they are mature, or they are of obvious size in scope to be moved
> from Lang. Basically, can we create a tight sub-package that fits in Lang.
> Currently there are only the hints of such there.

But no matter how big a package will grow, (thinking of the scope of lang), lang should as
always keep the simple, foundational classes within itself.

> 3) functor. I'm pretty ambivalent about functor. I'll happily accept
> either of the solutions offered in the functor debates. Identifier's
> dependency on functor does become a potential issue.

The simple and common interfaces (at least), plus the basic util classes, should remain in
lang, no matter what.

> 6) util.Validate. Seems like a useful tool. Would be better to add these
> to junit.framework.Assert and then have Assert in a tiny jar away from the
> rest of the junit jar, but seems unlikely.

No, validate is for runtime validation to speed up development, and to provide consistent
bad-in-parameter handling. It belongs in [lang]. If some tests in junit.framework.Assert are
considered useful for this purpose, we'd better clone the functionality into validate. The
Junit Assert class is made for (and will be maintained) for the testing framework.

/O



--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>


Mime
View raw message