Interesting idea, Toch. <CC-ing to jalview-dev. Please reply to the list!>
I'm not convinced all 'public static final' values should be stored in a single class for the whole codebase. It provides some convenience - but also risks dependency problems, and can easily become unmanageable. On 26/05/2016 17:18, Charles Ofoegbu (Staff) wrote: > I think it may be necessary to have a dedicated class (i.e. > Jalview.util.Constants) for keeping constants used in Jalview, > especially those widely utilise across different classes/packages. > The class should contain solely constants and NO methods. If there are constants that are defined and used *independently* from other methods in a class then they ought to be defined where they are used, period. If they are used in multiple places then they could usefully be refactored to a jalview.util.Constants class, but it is important to respect package boundaries. I created JAL-2121 yesterday because we will need to address the current sprawling dependency tree before we can create OSGi modules. > This will greatly reduce if not eliminate the problem of unwanted > dependencies creeping in from undesired classes/packages where constants > are defined. Can you give some examples here ? -- ------------------------------------------------------------------- Dr JB Procter, Jalview Coordinator, The Barton Group Division of Computational Biology, School of Life Sciences University of Dundee, Dundee DD1 5EH, UK. +44 1382 388734 | www.jalview.org | www.compbio.dundee.ac.uk _______________________________________________ Jalview-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.compbio.dundee.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/jalview-dev
