Am 06.03.2014 18:32, schrieb Ingo W.:
Am Donnerstag, 6. März 2014 08:09:36 UTC+1 schrieb blackdrag:
Am 06.03.2014 01:13, schrieb Ingo W.:
> This is a technical problem, but when you run into it, something is
> probably wrongly designed.
> And maybe one can simply solve it by programming against interfaces.
programming against interfaces works only if you (a) extract those, (b)
solve the problems with interfaces that are supposed to be solved by
inheritance, (c) forget about an inheritance in style of A-B-C, where B
is written in your alternative JVM language.
In that case you simply compile A, then B, then C. Where is the problem?
First of all, that you have to split your code base into three parts
that are not really three parts. Second, what do you do if for example B
has a field of type C?
(It is good to have tools then that find those dependencies and arrange
proper compilatioon order.)
I understood Per so that A needs B and B needs A, which is a code smell,
but YMMV.
Circular dependencies are not all that rare. If you have a project with
a hundred or more classes I really doubt that you have no circular
dependencies between any classes at all.
But if and when you have such cases, you better have a
language that produces java source code, as John said.
Maybe that's an option for Frege, but not for Groovy.
bye Jochen
--
Jochen "blackdrag" Theodorou - Groovy Project Tech Lead
blog: http://blackdragsview.blogspot.com/
german groovy discussion newsgroup: de.comp.lang.misc
For Groovy programming sources visit http://groovy-lang.org
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "JVM
Languages" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/jvm-languages.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
