Talk:Dependency Injection
From APIDesign
(Difference between revisions)
(Comment provided by Neng - via ArticleComments extension) |
(Comment provided by Maureen - via ArticleComments extension) |
||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
--Neng 04:25, 26 June 2013 (CEST) | --Neng 04:25, 26 June 2013 (CEST) | ||
| + | </div> | ||
| + | == Maureen said ... == | ||
| + | |||
| + | <div class='commentBlock'> | ||
| + | The problem with denniifg your product based on Features is that it leaves you at the mercy of the various Eclipse projects and how they've chosen to define their Features. Not all of them do what I would consider a good job of it; some (many?) publish only one or a few very coarse-grained Features, rather than taking the time and effort to properly separate and distinguish multiple units of reuse. In the RCP apps I've worked on, bloat was a concern (justified or not) and using Features would have forced us to include and inherit a lot of stuff from Eclipse projects that we didn't really need or want. | ||
| + | |||
| + | --Maureen 15:14, 26 June 2013 (CEST) | ||
</div> | </div> | ||
Current revision
Comments on Dependency Injection <comments />
Neng said ...
Maureen said ...
The problem with denniifg your product based on Features is that it leaves you at the mercy of the various Eclipse projects and how they've chosen to define their Features. Not all of them do what I would consider a good job of it; some (many?) publish only one or a few very coarse-grained Features, rather than taking the time and effort to properly separate and distinguish multiple units of reuse. In the RCP apps I've worked on, bloat was a concern (justified or not) and using Features would have forced us to include and inherit a lot of stuff from Eclipse projects that we didn't really need or want.
--Maureen 15:14, 26 June 2013 (CEST)
Follow
The problem with dnfieing your product based on Features is that it leaves you at the mercy of the various Eclipse projects and how they've chosen to define their Features. Not all of them do what I would consider a good job of it; some (many?) publish only one or a few very coarse-grained Features, rather than taking the time and effort to properly separate and distinguish multiple units of reuse. In the RCP apps I've worked on, bloat was a concern (justified or not) and using Features would have forced us to include and inherit a lot of stuff from Eclipse projects that we didn't really need or want.
--Neng 04:25, 26 June 2013 (CEST)