On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 2:02 PM, Jeroen Vermeulen < jeroen.vermeu...@canonical.com> wrote:
> On 17/09/13 12:42, Andrew Wilkins wrote: > > I don't think many people will disagree that deduplication of code is a >> bad idea in general. However, as with database denormalisation, there >> are exceptions to the rule. If in the process of deduplicating you make >> things considerably more complicated to handle the genericity, then what >> have you gained? >> > > I don't think "deduplication" quite does Tim's words justice. Capable > doctors don't just de-fever patients! > :) > Tim described duplication as a symptom. The difference is in identifying > the cause. Sometimes it takes you in much better directions than the > pursuit of de-duplication itself, and sometimes it leads you to accept mild > symptoms over the alternatives. I wasn't very clear in my reply; I completely agree with what you've written. My response was not to Tim, but to the blanket statements in the book. There are several statements that read like "duplication is the devil". I'm just saying that you can go too far in the other direction. Cheers, Andrew
-- Juju-dev mailing list Juju-dev@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev
