On Sun, 25 Nov 2001, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote: > Keep up the great work and, as a suggestion, avoid flexibility syndrome > like the plague :)
To quote Stefano from another posting: "Flexibility Syndrome is when you add another dimension to your solution space to fit a new problem without trying to rotate your previous solution space versors to cover the new problem." I don't know what a "versor" is, neither does my dictionary, but probably something like an axis. A less polite way to put it would be "change your problem to fit our solution" or "when your only tool is a hammer, a lot of problems look like nails" ;-) Seriously, the world is not just black and white. Everything has its advantages and its drawbacks. It seems to me that one of the drawbacks of IoC is a loss in flexibility. We all remember the logging discussions :) I agree with Stefano: break IoC once and it becomes useless. IoC is an authoritative design pattern and it loses its advantages, if it loses its authority. So the question is: shall we use it and live with the drawbacks or shall we use another design pattern? I say we use it, lest we write everything from scratch :) But Avalon being a framework and Phoenix a platform, there might be a user-level where IoC is optional. Interoperability is an important concept today. Nobody will use this framework and platform, if it is not at some level interoperable with legacy applications. So far things look good, but isn't it a pain in the ass, when you cannot just implement something you need because of IoC? :) cheers, Ulrich -- Ulrich Mayring DENIC eG, Softwareentwicklung -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
