decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
Grouping methods together | 52 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Grouping methods together
Authored by: tknarr on Monday, April 23 2012 @ 08:08 PM EDT

You wouldn't inherit from java.lang.Math if you just wanted to use it, you'd just import and use that package. You'd only inherit if you wanted to create your own custom version that changed the functionality in some way (eg. change tan() so it returns NaN instead of throwing an exception where the function's undefined). And if your XML parser does in fact use functions and data types defined in java.lang.Math, you want to introduce that dependency. You don't want multiple definitions for the same thing running around unless there's a really good reason for it (like they're not really the same thing, they just look like they are). The problem isn't from true dependencies where package 2 really does use package 1, it's bogus dependencies where package 1 isn't used by package 2, isn't used by anything package 2 uses, but gets pulled in anyway only because it happens to be in the same container as something that is needed.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )