If you only want code that is used, you can use an obfuscator? Using dependencies is the way to go, IMHO. Keep concerns tight. Change in one place in case of bugs and vulnerabilities
On Sat, 2 Nov 2024, 04:13 sebb, <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, 1 Nov 2024 at 22:27, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Emanuel and all, > > > > I see dependencies here and in other libraries a natural aspect of Java > > development in that it helps reuse proven solutions, where bug fixes and > > implementations are improved, while externalizing that cost to the > library > > which is otherwise born by the host code base. > > > > Reusing a library allows the host component to focus more on its business > > than having to draw attention from it. The benefits far outweigh any > > drawbacks in my view. > > That would be a reasonable argument if a substantial amount of code > were involved. > That is clearly not the case here. > > > In addition, reuse makes the code easier to read, easier to maintain, and > > easier to contribute to without getting lost in the weeds of code that's > > been copy pasted all over the place. > > That is not the case here. > > > A mention was made of the size on disk of jar files, this feels > immaterial > > when a JVM is now very good at only loading the classes it needs out of a > > jar file. > > > > HTH, > > Gary > > > > On Fri, Nov 1, 2024, 5:53 PM Emmanuel Bourg <ebo...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > Le 01/11/2024 à 20:04, Gary Gregory a écrit : > > > > Emanuel, > > > > > > > > -1 you are duplicating code (again) as a one-off while adding the > clutter > > > > of a ternary expression (and unnecessary parentheses). It is much > cleaner > > > > to use canonical-like code from our low level Commons IO library we > > > already > > > > use elsewhere. There is no benefit to expanding this API call. This > > > change > > > > forces the reader to parse out the ternary expreasion, the how, > instead > > > of > > > > focusing on the what of the method. > > > > > > Gary, > > > > > > There are 4 other ternary expressions in the ZipFile class, 90+ in the > > > zip package and over 270 in the whole code, not counting the unit > tests. > > > Some of these expressions were added by you this year, in commits > > > labeled "Use ternary expression" [1][2][3]. So I conclude that it's > > > acceptable to use this syntax. > > > > > > The extra parentheses improve the readability in my opinion, but I > don't > > > mind removing them. > > > > > > Expanding the API call is necessary to remove the undesired dependency > > > on Commons IO. > > > > > > Emmanuel Bourg > > > > > > [1] https://github.com/apache/commons-compress/commit/bbe6fd9a > > > [2] https://github.com/apache/commons-compress/commit/aa71cb93 > > > [3] https://github.com/apache/commons-compress/commit/b3e34e89 > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > 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 > >
