incubator-directmemory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Tommaso Teofili <tommaso.teof...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Build change etc..
Date Fri, 14 Oct 2011 08:25:32 GMT
Hi all,

disclaimer : I'm also an IDEA user now but, even though I haven't tried
Lombok in IDEA, I liked it when I tried it inside Eclipse some months ago.

2011/10/14 Daniel Manzke <daniel.manzke@googlemail.com>

> Just my 2 Cents.
>
> I read a lot of Lombok and found it interesting maybe for internal classes,
> but not for classes which are used by Externals.
>

I agree with Daniel here, I think mostly of people reading the APIs and
having difficulties understanding how things work so my concern is about
lowering the barrier for potential new users/devs.


> I've never tried it out, but what is about Debugging? The Code can never
> fit
> if I instrument the class with other Accessors or anything else?
> To make Debugging work, I had to include Lombok in my IDE isn't it?
>

I also have such doubts but, for me, it may only be a matter of ignorance
about how Lombok actually works.


>
> I personally don't like the idea, that I have to extend my IDE, because the
> one Library needs it and for initial testing, it would be too much
> overhead.
>
> I'm totally agree with the Getter- and Setter-Code. For small beans like
> described in one of the Mails, it can fit, but I think this is so 1980's.
> :)
> If you do a nice design, you can initialize your Classes, which need
> Getter-
> and Setter- with DI or Builder.
>

Generally I am for the Builder keeping objects unmutable (no setters).


> In the Code of my actual Company, we did the switch to have more Properties
> which are accessible by themself, because in internal classes, it doesn't
> matter if you depend on the Property or a Method. And I never saw a piece
> of
> Code, where the Getter- and Setter-Methods stay the same, if you are
> removing or changing the Property. ;)
>
> For external APIs it is more interesting, to have speaking Names for the
> Methods instead getMaxHeapSize().
>
>
>
my 2 cents.
Tommaso


> Bye,
> Daniel
>
>
> 2011/10/14 Maurizio Cucchiara <mcucchiara@apache.org>
>
> > Apparently it'd have seemed , but there are many Idea user like me,
> > which don't like to do without code analysis, IDE compiler and so on.
> > Furthermore, In times past, Struts developers have complained of the
> > use maven shade plugin [1] (which causes similar issues).
> > I think (though it is my opinion, this time I'm speaking without any
> > personal taste) this is a kind of barriers to entry
> >
> > [1] http://struts.markmail.org/thread/v4u4ic7m2nycltem
> >
> >
> > Twitter     :http://www.twitter.com/m_cucchiara
> > G+          :https://plus.google.com/107903711540963855921
> > Linkedin    :http://www.linkedin.com/in/mauriziocucchiara
> >
> > Maurizio Cucchiara
> >
> >
> >
> > On 14 October 2011 08:52, Simone Tripodi <simonetripodi@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > > Hola Mau,
> > >
> > >> generally I don't like class instrumentation so much, especially when
> > >> an IDE needs to provide a such kind of support.
> > >> And just for the record I am an Idea fan :)
> > >
> > > that sounds more a personal need than a technical reason ;)
> > > Have a nice day, all the best!
> > > Simo
> > >
> > > http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
> > > http://simonetripodi.livejournal.com/
> > > http://twitter.com/simonetripodi
> > > http://www.99soft.org/
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Viele Grüße/Best Regards
>
> Daniel Manzke
>

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