Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact tomcat-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 89498 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2000 14:42:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO gtei1.bellatlantic.net) (199.45.40.145) by locus.apache.org with SMTP; 23 Dec 2000 14:42:02 -0000 Received: from alfred.bear.com (adsl-141-151-137-67.bellatlantic.net [141.151.137.67]) by gtei1.bellatlantic.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with SMTP id JAA18869 for ; Sat, 23 Dec 2000 09:41:54 -0500 (EST) From: Roy Wilson Date: Sat, 23 Dec 2000 14:44:16 GMT Message-ID: <20001223.14441600@alfred.bear.com> Subject: MUD: when to refactor or reconstruct? To: tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org In-Reply-To: <3A43BCA5.668BFCF9@kpnqwest.no> References: <043901c06bf3$1792b750$3512a8c0@wspunkytse> <3A43BCA5.668BFCF9@kpnqwest.no> X-Mailer: Mozilla/3.0 (compatible; StarOffice/5.2; Linux) X-Priority: 3 (Normal) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Rating: locus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Stein, Gee, I wonder if you suggested this piece because of the TC3.x vs TC4.x = wars? :-) I wonder if there is any empirical criteria that can be appealed to in=20 deciding which situation TC is in.=20 Without it, the argument seems to go nowhere, since what is=20 beautiful/functional/etc for one is ugly/dysfunctional/etc for another. = Roy --=20 Roy Wilson E-mail: designrw@bellatlantic.net >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< On 12/22/00, 3:42:13 PM, "Stein M. Eliassen" wrote= =20 regarding Re: Mud (Was: [OT] Holiday Reading - Refactoring): > Hi, > about mud, here is a pattern called "Big ball of mud" by Brian Foote a= nd=20 Joseph > Yoder. > Read it! > http://www.laputan.org/mud/ > Regards > Stein M. Eliassen > System Developer - KPNQwest Norway AS > --------------------------------------------- > Business communications @ the speed of light.