tweety design [Re: What is Avalon?]

[Leo Simons <le...@apache.org>]

> Leo Simons wrote:
> >>I have taken steps to improve our branding and marketing, and
> >>I hope I can get you and the rest into a discussion regarding
> >>this:
> > 
> > 
> > <snip>
> > 
> > not necessary =) I agree with it. Now to do the coding...
> 
> :-D
> 
> Which brings me to the changes you've done to tweety.
> 
> IMHO making tweety a component itself makes it a microcontainer, not an 
> educational thing.

hmm. Don't think so...

it now is

a) example of a well-designed (sort of) component
b) source code that is still easy enough to follow for the programmers
the avalon system targets (ie, look at what main() does, then look at
the functions called from main(). Standard way to dissect a simple
program)
c) no more difficult to use from the commandline
d) no more difficult to explain (conceptually) in educational
documentation to potential users

which ones do you disagree with?

> I did not do it on putpose, because I think that this conceptual 
> overloading is confusing, ie a container that can be contained but is a 
> starting point.

you might be right there. Should be easy enough to not explain.

Looking at 90% of programming books, a class that contains a main()
method often instantiates itself as one of the first things in that
method. I think this is such a common pattern in programming that we
should use it as well.

> I would focus on putting this in microcontainer and keeping tweety as
> a simple container-runner that must work from commandline, and make
> microcontainer the first real simple container.

we could do this. It would put additional requirments on microcontainer.

The problem I see is that then tweety in itself would be an example of
how not to write software =)

cheers,

- Leo, still archiving the discussion...



--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>