Posted by pepe
on February 12, 2008 at 2:24 AM PST
Swash already had part of its code split to a seperate project, one with a pretty infamous name: preciseInternalDate.
Swash will see an other split: splines!
A good thing at the moment... but is it really?
Swash already had part of its code split to a seperate project, one with a pretty infamous name: preciseInternalDate .
Swash will see an other split: splines !
While i was finishing the splines part of swash, i said to myself that this could easily be extracted to an external package that could be useful to other projects than swash. In fact, i have other projects that would benefit from it, so even within my own projects that would be fine.
Then i thought of other parts that could be useful and could be extracted. But as i was thinking deeper on what could be externalized and reused i wondered about the burden of reuse.
How much does it burden to be smart and fancy? When is it wrong to do it right?
I mean, i -more than once- grumbled over the fact that i needed activation.jar to use javaMail. What if to use one API you suddenly need to add six or eight jars? Swash actually has two jars, soon three. We are all taught the wonderful advantages of object orientation like ease of reuse, but even if not pushed to an extreme, i see it as a burden. Is it acceptable? I don't know.
Next thing i could export to an external lib is interpolation, but as i will soon support java3D canvases within my rendering pipeline, its jars will become somewhat a dependency of swash. (but no, i certainly do not intend to see everyone forced to install java3D. Not having it will simply not render that part of the graph). Only those two things add at least 4 jars (and native libs for java3d)
Supporting inclusion of svg will also add its own pack of jars.
Sure, JSR-277 could solve the problem and make it transparent for developers to include anything but it's not there. And until it is really everywhere and used by everyone -which imho means years- there will be a "legacy mode" to support.
On an other hand, having no real central repository and no real way to handle dependencies makes it a harder decision to whether i should include the whole bang or handle their inexistence gracefully.
Solution number two might turn in a coding nightmare, while solution number one will certainly add unwanted burden to swash.
Bubonic plague or cholera?
What could be the jar count to choose between one or the other?