Mark Wielaard wrote:
But even then for a core class library implementation being
conservative about extensions is a good thing. If you aren't careful you
have to support a new way to use the library for years and then you will
have to make really sure that it is worth it both for your users and to
the developers that need to maintain backwards compatibility with it.
I fully agree.
I think the J2SE development over the last 10 years offers a strong
argument in favour of conservativism.
In 1996, the Java 1.0 Nutshell book came at whopping 460 pages,
describing the language, and the APIs. In 1995, the Java in Nutshell
book is now 1252 pages. And the language has not changed that much, to
warrant such a blowup: it largely due to the JCP putting every API
within their reach that could not run away fast enough into the J2SE.
As a result, countless trees have been decimated for documenting all the
backward compatibility cruft. ;)
cheers,
dalibor topic
_______________________________________________
Classpath mailing list
Classpath@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath
