Context and expectations

[Daniel Latrémolière]

Le 20/07/2012 00:12, mark.reinhold at oracle.com a écrit :
> To quote from the Project Jigsaw main page [1]:
>
>    The goal of this Project is to design and implement a standard
>    module system for the Java SE Platform, and to apply that system
>    to the Platform itself and to the JDK.
> [...]
> Do not expect, however, that asking questions that've already been
> answered, attacking the motivations or intelligence of those of us
> who've been working on this for a long time, casting insults, getting
> angry, or otherwise behaving impolitely will have any effect other
> than to set your bozo bit.
>
> - Mark
Thanks for all the responses. I am sorry if my mail about 
already-defunct JSR 294 was received as off-topic Jigsaw and 
over-simplified or insulting to Jigsaw workers. After many years of Java 
programming, I always like to have very simple code (KISS principle), 
because maintaining code become easier with highly constrained and 
state-of-art code (like by verifiers, formatting and rules of 
programming), without bad effects on performance, etc (if design was 
good and regularly optimised).

<angry>
Mark,

I don't know if I was the target of your comment, but given your 
response at my mail was the preceding message in the mailing list, I 
will respond, particularly given I clearly dislike people launching 
rumours or some other bad sociability behaviour (like in this case, 
attacking someone without beginning by explicitly telling him or 
targeting him in the mail containing the attack).

I don't think, I had this sort of attitude in my previous mail (I was 
honestly only interested in fast adoption of the subset of Java 
modularity which seemed, to me, to have the less risk of bad design). 
But when I see this sort of diktat without technical justification (like 
not the right of "attacking the motivations" given the written goal of 
Jigsaw), the freedom of my brain jump on your suggest of becoming angry.

- As a developer, improving my code quality (readability, maintenance, 
performance, security) by modularity is a valid requirement for me.
- For JDK, improving code quality and performance by something like 
modularity, storage of meta-information for JIT, etc. is a perfectly 
understandable requirement for me.
- A goal of modularizing JDK for modularizing JDK (like approximately 
said in Jigsaw [1]) is not an understandable requirement for me (cyclic 
dependency in my brain).

I have better understanding of the JavaSE 8 target, of creating a subset 
of JavaSE (core profile), like Android has already made.

I wish you a good work in Jigsaw, hoping to use it sometimes. This is 
not a criticism against Jigsaw workers, only some lack of trust in big 
projects too late, with too complex features because too heavy 
requirements. I prefer simple projects with small core and possibility 
of extensions; standardizing some core extensions only after real-world 
testing. For me, bigger is the project at start, slower is the adoption 
(sometimes, it is even: never is the adoption).

Just for clarity, I really like Jigsaw (particularly views) and not 
really OSGi (most of my current modularization needs are static and not 
dynamic, then more Jigsaw-like).

I always like to be clear, then sorry for my mail if it was 
inappropriate. I don't know if I am the target of your (Mark) comment, 
but I am not interested in a mailing list with this sort of rumours 
(unnamed targets). Then I will unsubscribe of this mailing-list because 
it is probably better and I dislike writing mail like this (I am not 
interested in knowing if my bozo bit is set at true or false value).

Daniel Latrémolière.

[1]: The goal of this Project is to design and implement a standard 
module system for the Java SE Platform, and to apply that system to the 
Platform itself and to the JDK.
</angry>