commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Min Cha <minslo...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Possible incubation?
Date Wed, 08 Apr 2009 14:00:56 GMT
For example, I think the ideas in Jeha could also be applied to
Commons-Validator. In my opinion, the examples of Commons-Validator could be
more simple and readable with using Annotation.

I don`t have many ideas yet but I see the potent possibility of Annotation
as I can see through Jeha. :)
I think your idea is still very fresh, even though you may see the problems
of Jeha through specific discussion.

Cheers.

On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 9:25 PM, Andre Dantas Rocha <
andre.dantas.rocha@uol.com.br> wrote:

> It sounds interesting to me. Do you already have any ideas of new domains?
>
> -----Mensagem original-----
> De: Min Cha [mailto:minslovey@gmail.com]
> Enviada em: quarta-feira, 8 de abril de 2009 07:03
> Para: Commons Developers List
> Assunto: Re: Possible incubation?
>
> Hi, Andre.
>
> I think that many legacy codes could be improved by Annotation.
> In this aspect, your idea seems like good.
>
> How do you think about expending the core idea of Jeha to other domains as
> well as exception handling?
> In my opinion, there might be many domains which can be improved though the
> core idea of Jena.
>
> Cheers. :)
>
> On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 3:42 PM, Jörg Schaible <joerg.schaible@gmx.de>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Andre,
> >
> > Andre Dantas Rocha wrote at Dienstag, 7. April 2009 14:38:
> >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > This message was originally sent to incubator list, but they suggest to
> > > post it here because *maybe* the idea can fit in Commons project.
> > >
> > > I'm developing a framework called Jeha. The main idea is to provide
> easy
> > > exception description and handling using annotations in methods and
> > > classes
> > > and some commons handlers. I believe that the  idea is simple, but
> > > powerful.
> > >
> > > The initial code and start guide of framework are here:
> > >
> > <
> >
> http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=242203&package_id=294
> > > 931&release_id=650572>
> > >
> >
> >
>
> http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=242203&package_id=2949
> > > 31&release_id=650572
> > >
> > > I'd like to hear from community if this idea is valuable for a possible
> > > incubation.
> > >
> > > Please let me know your opinion.
> >
> > It might be only me, but I see this approach a bit critical. On one hand
> > you're right, writing exception code is quite tedious sometimes, but with
> > your solution you wipe out any useful method signature regarding
> exception
> > declaration. What happens if I don't wanna handle certain exception types
> > or RuntimeException instances? I cannot simply rethrow from the handler.
> >
> > - Jörg
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Min Cha, Dreaming Developer
> Robust-Task :
> http://code.google.com/p/robust-coupe/wiki/RobustTaskIntroduction
> English : http://minslovey.blogspot.com
> Korean : http://minslovey.tistory.com
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>


-- 
Min Cha, Dreaming Developer
Robust-Task :
http://code.google.com/p/robust-coupe/wiki/RobustTaskIntroduction
English : http://minslovey.blogspot.com
Korean : http://minslovey.tistory.com

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message