Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #22123
| From | Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.java.programmer |
| Subject | Re: refactoring problem |
| Date | 2013-02-05 13:53 -0600 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <kernus$r6t$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | (2 earlier) <510ea8de$0$284$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <510fa7c1$0$6978$e4fe514c@news2.news.xs4all.nl> <0453206c-7053-4cf0-8ab2-b6c5e817a69a@googlegroups.com> <kerah4$uka$1@dont-email.me> <n1k2h85aj4sq664gvkdf72kt41hm05717o@4ax.com> |
On 2/5/2013 12:38 PM, Gene Wirchenko wrote: >> I think it might be worth filtering out feature requests by asking >> requestors to list at least one drawback of including their feature. If >> they can't think of any, then they are going to be totally clueless >> about how easy or hard a feature is to implement. > > That is too easy. Make it at least three drawbacks. In my experience, most people coming up with inane feature requests can't articulate one drawback. Most of them that can rationalize at least one drawback can come up with several more if pressed, so it's only the first batch that's really useful as a filter. I will point out that my experience is largely limited to open-source projects' RFE pages, and some conversations thereof. Among such inanities as I have actually seen people opine are gems such as: * Integrating 16MB extensions will magically make that size disappear [1] * It is easier to ask novice users to install a custom shell program and then write out ssh automatic upload scripts than it is to make a simple SFTP plugin (in terms of UI) * A userspace program should distribute a custom filesystem driver that it uses internally for all of its state [2] * If the "From" header identifies X as a sender, a message can only have come from X I am, of course, excluding the hundreds of variants of "how had can it be?" [1] "Surely there's some code savings to be had by integration, right?" was the response I got after pointing out that this doesn't work. [2] To be fair, a devotee who thought that Plan 9 was the greatest thing since sliced bread. -- Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not tried it. -- Donald E. Knuth
Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
refactoring problem Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2013-02-03 06:30 -0800
Re: refactoring problem Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2013-02-03 16:23 +0000
Re: refactoring problem Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom2@eastlink.ca> - 2013-02-03 12:27 -0400
Re: refactoring problem Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2013-02-03 12:35 -0800
Re: refactoring problem Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-02-03 15:37 -0500
Re: refactoring problem Leif Roar Moldskred <leifm@dimnakorr.com> - 2013-02-03 15:21 -0600
Re: refactoring problem Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom2@eastlink.ca> - 2013-02-03 17:38 -0400
Re: refactoring problem Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-02-03 16:46 -0500
Re: refactoring problem Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-02-03 14:36 -0800
Re: refactoring problem Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-02-03 11:34 -0500
Re: refactoring problem Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2013-02-03 11:54 -0600
Re: refactoring problem Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-02-03 13:13 -0500
Re: refactoring problem Knute Johnson <nospam@knutejohnson.com> - 2013-02-03 10:20 -0800
Re: refactoring problem Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-02-03 13:32 -0500
Re: refactoring problem Peter Duniho <NpOeStPeAdM@NnOwSlPiAnMk.com> - 2013-02-03 10:50 -0800
Re: refactoring problem Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2013-02-03 21:38 +0100
Re: refactoring problem "Chris Uppal" <chris.uppal@metagnostic.REMOVE-THIS.org> - 2013-02-04 08:11 +0000
Re: refactoring problem Peter Duniho <NpOeStPeAdM@NnOwSlPiAnMk.com> - 2013-02-04 03:56 -0800
Re: refactoring problem Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2013-02-04 13:21 +0100
Re: refactoring problem Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-02-04 12:35 -0800
Re: refactoring problem Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2013-02-04 22:15 +0100
Re: refactoring problem Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-02-04 13:49 -0800
Re: refactoring problem Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2013-02-04 23:51 +0100
Re: refactoring problem Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-02-04 13:53 -0800
Re: refactoring problem Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2013-02-04 23:48 +0100
Re: refactoring problem Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-02-04 17:08 -0800
Re: refactoring problem Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2013-02-05 10:07 +0100
Re: refactoring problem Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-02-05 13:13 -0800
Re: refactoring problem Jim Gibson <jimsgibson@gmail.com> - 2013-02-05 13:20 -0800
Re: refactoring problem Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-02-05 13:31 -0800
Re: refactoring problem Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-02-05 21:42 -0500
Re: refactoring problem Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-02-04 18:33 -0500
Re: refactoring problem Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-02-04 18:32 -0500
Re: refactoring problem Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2013-02-05 01:50 +0000
Re: refactoring problem Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2013-02-05 10:04 -0600
Re: refactoring problem Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2013-02-05 10:38 -0800
Re: refactoring problem Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2013-02-05 13:53 -0600
Re: refactoring problem Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-02-05 21:43 -0500
Re: refactoring problem markspace <markspace@nospam.nospam> - 2013-02-05 19:15 -0800
Re: refactoring problem Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-02-08 23:58 -0500
Re: refactoring problem Joerg Meier <joergmmeier@arcor.de> - 2013-02-05 11:09 +0100
csiph-web