Why does the Java dependency management world have to suck so badly? Is it not
crazy to want projects to be able to publish their own releases and to make it
easy for other projects to depend on those published releases? Why do I have to
reconfigure the standard configuration to add new repository sources? Why
doesn't the IvyRep resolver work and do something sophisticated?
Why can't I just fucking put in my ivy.xml:
<dependency org="com.samskivert" name="samskivert" rev="1.0" conf="runtime"
source="http://samskivert.googlecode.com/svn/releases"/>
and have Ivy do something smart like assume that there will be a standard
directory structure at the specified root and that it will contain the ivy.xml
and module.jar file that it needs, and just download them?
Instead I have to write a ton of fucking boilerplate and wire it all in via a
separate ivysettings.xml file, and then helpfully instruct anyone who uses my
fucking library that they too can have the pleasure of doing the same.
columns in the results to match the FieldMarshaller column names, so we have
to use those rather than the field names. Also, shadowed fields need to use
the column names of the fields that they're shadowing.
date from date(). We should probably just modify DateFuncs.date to
return a date in both cases (perhaps with a separate DateFun.DateCast
class), but for now it's easier to have MySQL return a timestamp as
well.
the terminator (we encode the terminator as a different character).
This is somewhat nicer when inspecting an encoded String, and allows
for a future in which the decoder easily counts the number of terminator
characters and pre-allocates the storage, if we so desired.
There are some optimizations that could probably be made, but
for now I defer to the new One Rule of Optimization:
"Do not optimize for performance unless it does not weird the code or
it Really Matters".
- continue to terminate Strings with a newline
- turn newlines inside a String into "\n"
- turn null elements into "\0".
This is one additional character when encoding nulls, but
I think it may improve readability..
contains generic type information which would allow a transformer to do the
right thing with a field of, say, type Set<Integer>.
If we had unit tests for StringIterable, I'd know that I didn't just break it.
I'd also know that it worked in the first place. :)
to the ternary operator are boolean constants, don't use the ternary operator.
a ? true : x == a || x
a ? x : true == !a || x
a ? false : x == !a && x
a ? x : false == a && x
case, seeing it fail, then adding the code to handle it was rather satisfying.
I'm not jumping on the TDD bandwagon or anything, but libraries like Depot are
clear cases where vigorous unit testing is a big win.
Michael Bayne