tomcat-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From João Paulo Lemes Machado <lemesmach...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Opportunities for cohesion improvement and refatoring
Date Wed, 02 Aug 2017 19:18:08 GMT
When you talk about the cost, do you mean backward compatibility?


2017-08-02 4:38 GMT-03:00 Mark Thomas <markt@apache.org>:

> On 02/08/2017 00:02, João Paulo Lemes Machado wrote:
> > Hi Mark.
> >
> > Did you take a look at my suggestion?
>
> Yes. I don't think the cost is worth the benefit.
>
> Mark
>
>
> >
> > 2017-07-25 15:33 GMT-03:00 João Paulo Lemes Machado <
> lemesmachado@gmail.com>
> > :
> >
> >> Hi Mark, tanks for the comment.
> >>
> >> Let me take the DataSourceProxy as example.
> >>
> >> This class has 142 methods  of which 112 are get () and set () methods.
> >> We could mark these methods as deprecated and copy them to a new class:
> >> DataSourceProxyConfig, but we would leave them in the DataSourceProxy
> class,
> >> and they would be removed gradually.
> >>
> >> Those parameters and methods would be accessed by an instance variable
> of
> >> DataSourceProxyConfig in DataSourceProxy.
> >>
> >> So we will keep the methods in the original class for some time so that
> >> developers who have some assumption about the class can adapt.
> >>
> >> However, when choosing the methods we could analyze their complexity. If
> >> it is a simple set () or get () that only sets or returns a value it
> would
> >> be prioritized.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Methods that have a greater complexity, or that make calls to other
> >> methods would not be extracted at first.
> >>
> >>
> >> And if for some reason we can not make these changes (remove the
> methods),
> >> this strategy can be adopted to prevent these classes from growing even
> >> more. It can also be adopted as a new practice for creating new classes
> in
> >> the future.
> >>
> >>
> >> What do you think?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> 2017-07-25 10:40 GMT-03:00 Mark Thomas <markt@apache.org>:
> >>
> >>> On 25/07/17 13:55, João Paulo Lemes Machado wrote:
> >>>> Hello everyone.
> >>>>
> >>>> My name is João Paulo, I am a graduate student the Federal University
> of
> >>>> Uberlandia, Brazil.
> >>>>
> >>>> I was analyzing the modularization of some classes of Tomcat, and  I
> >>>> identified some opportunities for cohesion improvement in the
> following
> >>>> classes:
> >>>>
> >>>> DataSourceProxy
> >>>> ConnectionPool
> >>>> BasicDataSource
> >>>> DelegatingCallableStatement
> >>>> PoolProperties
> >>>> PoolConfiguration
> >>>
> >>> Those look to be from a mix of implementations (Commons DBCP and
> >>> Tomcat's jdbc-pool).
> >>>
> >>> This is the place to discuss changes to Tomcat's jdbc-pool. DBCP
> changes
> >>> should be discussed on the Apache Commons dev mailing list.
> >>>
> >>>> Could you please take a look and tell me if it's viable?
> >>>
> >>> Hard to comment without a concrete example.
> >>>
> >>>> Maybe some of these classes could benefit from some kind of
> refactoring
> >>>> that we can discuss.
> >>>
> >>> Maybe. What did you have in mind?
> >>>
> >>> Mark
> >>>
> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org
> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tomcat.apache.org
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tomcat.apache.org
>
>

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