i guess one could count the ability to create test cases without extending
TestCase could count as a positive thing

On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 8:55 AM, Mark Volkmann <[email protected]>wrote:

> That reminds me of JUnit 4. Supposedly the @Test annotation is a good
> thing. I don't see how the ability to create test methods whose names
> do not begin with "test" is a good thing.
>
> On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 6:36 PM, Augusto Sellhorn
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Annotations are a funny thing, you can (like anything) also abuse
> > them. There's a project out there (don't know if I should point it
> > out) that decided to create listeners via annotations instead of
> > listener interfaces.
> >
> > It actually ends up with the code being less clear than the
> > alternative.
> >
> > ex:
> >
> > public class TrumpetTest implements TrumpetListener{
> >        public void playTrumpet(Event ev) {
> >        }
> >
> >        public Test() {
> >             Trumpet trumpet = new Trumpet ();
> >              trumpet .addTrumpetListener(this);
> >        }
> > }
> >
> > vs
> >
> > @Listener
> > public class TrumpetTest {
> >       @PlayTrumpet
> >       public void annotatedListen(Event ev) {
> >       }
> >
> >      public Test() {
> >             Trumpet trumpet = new Trumpet ();
> >              trumpet .addListener(this);
> >      }
> > }
> >
> > Now the annotation approach makes it so that there are less
> > addXXXListener() methods, and I can have an uber listener that has a
> > list of annotations (@PlayTrumpet, @FixTrumpet, etc) but this makes
> > the code harder to maintain.
> >
> > The annotation makes it so there's only one method signature for the
> > events, with a shared event object and also (at least in the API I'm
> > talking about) you can tag a method with an annotation with different
> > args, you just don't get the event (or even know about the contract
> > for the event).
> >
> > Horrible!
> >
> > On Oct 25, 6:41 pm, Liam Knox <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> Yes fantastic metric characters are in measuring bolierplate
> >>
> >> i.e
> >>
> >> foo() {
> >> t.s();
> >>
> >> t.c();
> >>
> >> }
> >>
> >> or
> >>
> >> @Transactional
> >> foo(){}
> >>
> >> On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 10:31 PM, Kevin Wright <
> [email protected]>wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> > No, because that's based on an assumption that more lines = more
> >> > functionality
> >>
> >> > Though I can see how those in favour of not removing boilerplate, and
> >> > questioning the benefits of a 30% reduction might see this as a good
> metric
> >>
> >> > On 25 October 2010 14:28, Liam Knox <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> >> Should we go back to measuring productivity by lines of code written?
> >>
> >> >> On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 10:26 PM, Augusto Sellhorn <
> >> >> [email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> >>> This is really bizarre, I've heard people say that fewer lines of
> code
> >> >>> is desirable, but this is the first time I hear somebody say that X%
> >> >>> fewer characters lead almost exactly to X% reduction in complexity!
> >>
> >> >>> ---------------
> >>
> >> >>> for(int
> >> >>> indexOfAuthorInCurrentIteration=0;
> >> >>> indexOfAuthorInCurrentIteration<=authorsFromNameQuery.length;
> >> >>> ++indexOfAuthorInCurrentIteration) {
> >> >>>  Author currentAuthorBeingIteratedOver
> >> >>> = authorsFromNameQuery[indexOfAuthorInCurrentIteration]
> >> >>>  // do something with the author
> >> >>> }
> >>
> >> >>> ---------------
> >>
> >> >>> Nobody is saying you have to use super long names here, what you are
> >> >>> saying is that less characters more % reduction in complexity, which
> >> >>> leads to this
> >>
> >> >>> for (int i=0; i <= aq.length; ++i) {
> >> >>>    Author aa = aq[i];
> >> >>>     // do something with the author
> >> >>> }
> >>
> >> >>> Which I don't think results in any % less chances of bugs, as a
> matter
> >> >>> of fact it ends up being less readable than some reasonable and
> clear
> >> >>> names that could have been applied.
> >>
> >> >>> I hope in your code reviews you are not doing character counts and
> >> >>> blasting developers on these bogus measurements.
> >>
> >> >>> --
> >> >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups
> >> >>> "The Java Posse" group.
> >> >>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> >> >>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> >> >>> [email protected]<javaposse%[email protected]>
> <javaposse%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups .com>
> >> >>> .
> >> >>> For more options, visit this group at
> >> >>>http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
> >>
> >> >>  --
> >> >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups
> >> >> "The Java Posse" group.
> >> >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> >> >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> >> >> [email protected]<javaposse%[email protected]>
> <javaposse%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups .com>
> >> >> .
> >> >> For more options, visit this group at
> >> >>http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
> >>
> >> > --
> >> > Kevin Wright
> >>
> >> > mail / gtalk / msn : [email protected]
> >> > pulse / skype: kev.lee.wright
> >> > twitter: @thecoda
> >>
> >> >  --
> >> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups
> >> > "The Java Posse" group.
> >> > To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> >> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> >> > [email protected]<javaposse%[email protected]>
> <javaposse%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups .com>
> >> > .
> >> > For more options, visit this group at
> >> >http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
> >
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "The Java Posse" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> [email protected]<javaposse%[email protected]>
> .
> > For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> R. Mark Volkmann
> Object Computing, Inc.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "The Java Posse" group.
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> [email protected]<javaposse%[email protected]>
> .
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
>
>


-- 
http://mapsdev.blogspot.com/
Marcelo Takeshi Fukushima

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The 
Java Posse" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.

Reply via email to