On 19/09/16 13:39, Suneel Marthi wrote:
> The way this PR is now is so similar to how bad IBM SystemML which is a
> hackwork of hurriedly put together and something I have often pointed out
> to others as a clear example of "how not to design crappy software". See
> this gist of an example code snippet from IBM SystemML -
Not sure if you are looking at PR93, or the URL I sent you.
I agree that a large, explicit enumeration via a switch/if statement is
not conducive to extensibility, and that is what PIRK-63 is trying to
> First things for the project:
> 1. Move away from using the java properties (this is so 2002 way of doing
> things) to using TypeSafe style configurations which allow for structured
>From a quick look, that covers a different level, namely how the
configurations are represented. First we need to look at the responder
architecture to allow for different responder types to be plugged in to
the Pirk framework.
Each plug-in responder type can figure out how to depict it's configuration.
> 2. From a Responder design, there would be a Responder-impl-class property
> which would be read from TypeSafe config and the appropriate driver class
I've not used style configurations before. I think they overlap with
the SystemConfiguration a bit. It would be interesting to see what changes.
> As an example for the above ^^^ two, please look at at the Oryx 2.0 project
> for reference
I'd rather look at a proposed change to Pirk ;-)
> On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 2:28 PM, Tim Ellison <t.p.elli...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> How about an approach like this?
>> The "on-ramp" is the driver , which calls upon the service to find a
>> plug-in  that claims to implement the required platform responder,
>> e.g. .
>> The list of plug-ins is given in the provider's JAR file, so the ones we
>> provide in Pirk are listed together , but if you split these into
>> modules, or somebody brings their own JAR alongside, these would be
>> listed in each JAR's services/ directory.
>> I'm not even going to dignify this with a WIP PR, it is far from ready,
>> so proceed with caution. There is hopefully enough there to show the
>> approach, and if it is worth continuing I'm happy to do so.