From APIDesign
(Difference between revisions)
|
|
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| - | '''Done: 74d64dca0394'''
| |
| | | | |
| - |
| |
| - | The example of the JDK as non-modular may be out of date by the time you go to print! :)
| |
| - |
| |
| - | * I am afraid we publish few years sooner
| |
| - |
| |
| - | I'd like some discussion of how you modularize a project that already has a large, non-modular, full-of-spaghetti code base.
| |
| - | I think this would resonate with a lot of programmers.
| |
| - |
| |
| - | * I may blog about it or describe that in wiki, but for the book it would be maybe too detailed. Just remind me.
| |
| - |
| |
| - | Also, I'd like you to address non-runtime modularization. That is, just enforcing module dependencies at compile time, in the
| |
| - | ant script. It's perfectly valid, requires no additional software like OSGI, but has some pitfalls (Class.forName, etc).
| |
| - | For some organizations that are mistrustful of runtime modularization's performance impact (warranted or not), it's better
| |
| - | than nothing.
| |
| - | * I have contributed description of Ant [http://ant.apache.org/manual/CoreTasks/javac.html Javac task parameters], search for '''sourcepath=""'''
| |
| - |
| |
| - | --[[User:RichUnger|RichUnger]] 22:40, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
| |
| - |
| |
| - |
| |
| - | # Page 99: "Modular programming is here to make it happen." This implies that modular programming encourages the degradation of the architecture rather than preventing it, so you probably meant "Modular programming is here to help prevent it."
| |
| - |
| |
| - | --[[User:TomWheeler|TomWheeler]] Sat Apr 12 19:13:37 CDT 2008
| |
Revision as of 05:54, 14 June 2008
Follow
