<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.3.3" -->
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Java is minimal only in the apidocs, not in our minds</title>
	<link>http://www.blog.dannynet.net/archives/26</link>
	<description>Pondering Programming and Poetry</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 09 Jul 2008 01:03:26 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Akshay</title>
		<link>http://www.blog.dannynet.net/archives/26#comment-70</link>
		<dc:creator>Akshay</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Dec 2005 14:09:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.blog.dannynet.net/archives/26#comment-70</guid>
		<description>"The following isn’t quite that bad ... "

Well quite contrary.  Its a bad example because DefaultOWLIndividual class is definitely used by as many ppl as the java.util.* classes! 

Context is important.  If I am writing a one time/one customer banking application and I decide to write a CreditAccount class, its upto me and my team to keep a minimal or hamane interface (or even Fluent for that matter, read the latest entry by Martin Fowler). 

But if I were writing a graphics or math library, the forces will be stronger in my mind to keep things humane (the ruby humane, not the Java humane!).  For comparision's sake, look at what has happened with the java.util.Date. Think JodaTime !!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;The following isn’t quite that bad &#8230; &#8221;</p>
<p>Well quite contrary.  Its a bad example because DefaultOWLIndividual class is definitely used by as many ppl as the java.util.* classes! </p>
<p>Context is important.  If I am writing a one time/one customer banking application and I decide to write a CreditAccount class, its upto me and my team to keep a minimal or hamane interface (or even Fluent for that matter, read the latest entry by Martin Fowler). </p>
<p>But if I were writing a graphics or math library, the forces will be stronger in my mind to keep things humane (the ruby humane, not the Java humane!).  For comparision&#8217;s sake, look at what has happened with the java.util.Date. Think JodaTime !!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: cs</title>
		<link>http://www.blog.dannynet.net/archives/26#comment-28</link>
		<dc:creator>cs</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Dec 2005 22:20:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.blog.dannynet.net/archives/26#comment-28</guid>
		<description>"Why do people get nervous over big numbers so often?"

Have you ever tried to use a class that itself has a hundred methods and inherits hundreds more from other classes? The following isn't quite that bad, but I think it makes Elliotte's point very well: http://protege-owl.sourceforge.net/javadoc/edu/stanford/smi/protegex/owl/model/impl/DefaultOWLIndividual.html

If you really think that more is better, why don't you also add Graph and Tree operations to that Array too? That would be even more convenient.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Why do people get nervous over big numbers so often?&#8221;</p>
<p>Have you ever tried to use a class that itself has a hundred methods and inherits hundreds more from other classes? The following isn&#8217;t quite that bad, but I think it makes Elliotte&#8217;s point very well: <a href="http://protege-owl.sourceforge.net/javadoc/edu/stanford/smi/protegex/owl/model/impl/DefaultOWLIndividual.html" rel="nofollow">http://protege-owl.sourceforge.net/javadoc/edu/stanford/smi/protegex/owl/model/impl/DefaultOWLIndividual.html</a></p>
<p>If you really think that more is better, why don&#8217;t you also add Graph and Tree operations to that Array too? That would be even more convenient.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
