[jsword-devel] i18n and Actions

[Joe Walker]

Hi Andy,

I think the biggest difference between our coding styles is that you 
prefer a minimalist approach, but my approach aims to be more generic.

The reason I tend toward a more generic approach is that usually you can 
turn a generic but slow solution into a faster minimalist solution, but 
it is harder to generalize a highly tuned minimalist solution, however I 
can understand that this approach is frustrating for developers that 
need to get at the more minimalist approach during development.

The 2 examples in your mail (Actions and I18N) both fit into this 
pattern. We can easily run some eclpise refactorings or ant macros 
across the JSword source to convert the generic Msg i18n solution into a 
minimalist String based i18n solution, but the reverse is not possible. 
Similar arguments work for JSwordGUI vs. Desktop.

There are plenty of things we can do to make JSword faster, but for me 
making it function properly is more important right now so my vote is to 
continue to be generalist until the cries of "xyz is too slow for me" 
drown out the cries of "xyz doesn't work".

Sorry to be a stick-in-the-mud.

Joe.

Aleksander Rozman - Andy wrote:

> At 2.4.2004, you wrote:
> 
...
> 
> I have already told that this way of creating Actions is not good... 
> When you create application you should use as little as possible action 
> classes, but instead implement one ActionListener for more actions. Here 
> is sample how I did it (I started makeing changes on JSword some time 
> ago). Also included is my file for I18N..., which is used by this class.
> 
> I also mentioned about I18N, but I couldn't convince the boss that my 
> way is better even if it's used by almost all other java programmers...
> 
> Andy