Path: csiph.com!news.swapon.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: Robert Klemme Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer Subject: Re: Things have 'moved on' apparently Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2015 18:54:07 +0100 Lines: 29 Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: individual.net q25jWxNSRhwF5olfS5UmEwUQ6LUsN3slmcx8zIJSGUu0VdYQY= Cancel-Lock: sha1:9xCXgvTa/zPlPRAqumsP1bFQMlU= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 In-Reply-To: Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.java.programmer:33026 On 08.11.2015 09:00, leif.roar@dimnakorr.com wrote: > Arne Vajh=C3=B8j wrote: >> Which could somehow be phrased as: it is bad to have a ton of librarie= s >> but it is even worse to not have a ton of libraries. > > Sometimes, not often, but sometimes, it _is_ better to write the stuff > yourself. I once saw a project that included Ant as a dependency just > to use a trivial utility method (it was either String manipulation or > Date parsing. I forget which.) There are also other cases where it is better to bite the bullet and=20 write stuff yourself, even if it is complicated. That happened to us=20 once and the reason was the awful quality of the library used and the=20 slowness of the provider to come up with bug fixes. Bottom line: you have to die one death or another (is this also an=20 English phrase btw.?) and there is no general rule - just the usual=20 trade offs. Kind regards robert --=20 remember.guy do |as, often| as.you_can - without end http://blog.rubybestpractices.com/