One significant risk in a major rewrite of an important section is regression. This is particularly true given the paucity of tests in FOP. You will have to assume that such a rewrite is going to produce a number of regressions (while continuing to pass the test suite).
On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 9:45 AM, Andreas Delmelle < andreas.delme...@telenet.be> wrote: > > On 27 May 2015, at 01:59, Luis Bernardo <lmpmberna...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Hi Luis > > > > > In my view any code that does more becomes more complex, not less > comprehensible. The same happens with FOP. > > Very true, indeed. I recall having argued that same point on this list in > the past. > "Doing more with less" is, IMO, executive lingo that is almost always > meant to hide some uglier truths... ;) > > It is more a matter of making sure that new code that gets added will > follow the "right" path, if you will (whatever that may mean). No criticism > there. After all, I *was* part of the team for years, so know full well to > what extent time and resource constraints have influenced some of those > decisions. > > > If you want to rewrite the layout engine and do it with less code then > go for it. You will get a +1 from me. > > OK, good to know. > > Just to be clear: it is not so much a 'rewrite' as it is optimising or > streamlining what is already there, and it remains to be seen whether it > will literally lead to 'less' code, since it would require introduction of > a few new interfaces/classes. Overall, I would expect the total LOC to go > up, slightly, but I have not yet finished so cannot say anything for sure > there at this point. > > Thanks! > > > KR > > Andreas >