commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gary Gregory <>
Subject Re: [codec][lang] LetterCase proposal
Date Thu, 04 Apr 2013 22:07:22 GMT
Worry not, I consider code duplication an affront to my extreme/agile
programmer creds as much as the next guy/gal.

This said, yes, I am proposing duplication.

Over the years, when I've mentioned one commons component depending on
another, tomatoes start flying.

There is a definitive camp that really wants standalone components. I
assume there are the folks that are RAM or disk challenged by their runtime

My current context is a big app server, we deliver ~100 third party
libraries, some we use directly, others are dragged in transitively. To
give you an idea, we embed Jetty and CXF, so that's a big pile just there.

For my sanity, the less code the better, the less jars the better,
thankfully, both Jetty and CXF deliver 'all-in-one' jars, but their
dependencies are all individual jars.

Ideally, I would but all 'commons commons' code in [lang] when that makes
sense, like with LetterCase, and have all the other components depend on



On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 4:37 PM, Emmanuel Bourg <> wrote:

> Le 04/04/2013 22:12, sebb a écrit :
> > The enum is two-state only; the duplication is tiny.
> The duplication will create a confusion in projects using lang and codec
> (which is quite common). Typically the auto import popup in IntelliJ
> will suggest the two alternatives when trying to resolve the LetterCase
> enum, and the hesitation to select the good one is at least equivalent
> to the unintuitive boolean value for upper/lower cases.
> Emmanuel Bourg

E-Mail: |
JUnit in Action, 2nd Ed: <http://goog_1249600977>
Spring Batch in Action: <>

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