On 18 Feb 2011 20:59, "Fabrizio Giudici" <[email protected]> wrote: > > Today I've run into Qi4j: > > http://www.qi4j.org/qi4j/146.html > > > Many good things in the basic principles, which I'm using since a few time, but I'm not convinced on the rest. Also, while I understand the introduction of the term "Component Oriented Programming" to stress out some strong differences in a world of getter/setters and fat classes, to me it just sounds as Object Oriented Programming, just well done. Thoughts? >
It's full of great ideas, but is unfortunately limited by Java's syntax. For the most part, qi4j functionality has been more effectively subsumed into other jvm languages with a great deal more elegance, this was actually one of the stronger drivers behind my interest in Scala. To get a better feel for the principles involved, I'd strongly anyone interested to run a web search for the "DCI pattern" and do a bit of background reading. > -- > Fabrizio Giudici - Java Architect, Project Manager > Tidalwave s.a.s. - "We make Java work. Everywhere." > java.net/blog/fabriziogiudici - www.tidalwave.it/people > [email protected] > > -- > 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. > -- 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.
