On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 11:15 AM, Torsten Curdt <tcurdt@vafer.org> wrote:
>> Not sure what
>> factors contributed to the stagnation of BCEL development, but I like
>> to think of Commons as "the" swiss army knife for Java developers--any
>> library with a sharply defined surface area and, even better,
>> satisfying some need commonly encountered by Java developers, belongs
>> here IMO.
>
> So according to you byte code manipulation is a "commonly encountered
> need" for java developers?
> I guess then Commons should/could be the home of virtually any java
> library out there.
Point taken; however, from the "when all you have is a hammer"
perspective, if byte code generation/manipulation were made easy
enough, folk might use it more! ;)
>
> ...plus your favorite kitchen sink :)
:P I did say "even better" i.e. that being a common requirement is a
plus rather than a requirement. I see nothing in our charter that
places this type of bar. My vision of Commons is as a set of "atoms,"
if you will, in terms of which all broader-in-scope libraries may be
defined. Like the philosophy of Unix system tools.
Matt
>
> That's not how I interpret our charter.
>
> cheers,
> Torsten
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
|