On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 11:15 AM, Torsten Curdt <tcu...@vafer.org> wrote: >> Not sure what >> factors contributed to the stagnation of BCEL development, but I like >> to think of Commons as "the" swiss army knife for Java developers--any >> library with a sharply defined surface area and, even better, >> satisfying some need commonly encountered by Java developers, belongs >> here IMO. > > So according to you byte code manipulation is a "commonly encountered > need" for java developers? > I guess then Commons should/could be the home of virtually any java > library out there.
Point taken; however, from the "when all you have is a hammer" perspective, if byte code generation/manipulation were made easy enough, folk might use it more! ;) > > ...plus your favorite kitchen sink :) :P I did say "even better" i.e. that being a common requirement is a plus rather than a requirement. I see nothing in our charter that places this type of bar. My vision of Commons is as a set of "atoms," if you will, in terms of which all broader-in-scope libraries may be defined. Like the philosophy of Unix system tools. Matt > > That's not how I interpret our charter. > > cheers, > Torsten > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
