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
>

Reply via email to