Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
On 14 Dec, Mark L. Fussell wrote: > [Did you post these replies also? I don't yet see them from the list.] Uh, probably not. Sorry. > > If you can look at your code and see Objects, you should go ahead and extract > > them out into smaller classes. OOP is going to benefit you and anyone > > else who is going to be reading and modifying your code in six months. > > Although I would normally encourage this I think we are [or I am] on a > slightly more esoteric "size-management" optimization topic for a very > particular case of an ultra-small, fast-download, XML parser. In any > other case, ignore what I said about file sizes and just design really > nice clean OO software. Yes, especially when we're dealing with web distributed packages. The argument to not use jar files because of their non-portability (in that not everybody supports them yet) has weight, but will again become increasingly insignificant as platforms become Java 1.1 conformant. Unless I am mistaken, jar file support is part of the required core Java distribution. -- |.. --------------------- Sean Russell ---------------------- <|> ser@j... <-> http://jersey.uoregon.edu/ser /|\ ------- [ Software Engineer ] -------- /| [ PGP info available from my web site ]
|
