Comments on: Keeping layers decoupled

By: Pat

Pat — Tue, 21 Feb 2006 07:56:45 +0000

Sorry to hear that people weasled their way around the JDepend stuff (especially from the level of developers I remember working with back there), but I suppose rules are bound to be broken at some stage. Nice to see a few alternative approaches suggested

By: brett

brett — Sat, 18 Feb 2006 11:07:37 +0000

COMMENT:
I remember when Simon and James were working on it, I’ll have to check JOODI out.

While you can manage dependencies with modules at compile time it seems to me this would only really work at coarse grained layers; for web, domain, ejb (if u are unfortunate enough to have them).

I would expect it to be more of a pain to try and add finer grained dependency rules thru compilation when with CompileWithWalls and I assume JOODI you add a single line and introduce a new dependency check.

Also is easy for governance, as I should only need to watch for changes to the dependency rules file for potential offenders trying to break rules.

The JDepend API is limited, while it does it’s main task ok. Trying to use it to stem cyclic dependencies or report the offending class/pkg that creates the cycle required me to write code I just shouldn’t have had to.

By: Robert

Robert — Fri, 17 Feb 2006 12:12:35 +0000

I personally think that the best way of solving dependency problems is to have physically seperate modules/subsystems/projects/you-name-it. Compile them seperately, and you _know_ what your dependencies are.

By: Marty Andrews

Marty Andrews — Fri, 17 Feb 2006 04:38:42 +0000

I’m using JOODI to do exactly this at the moment. Its very fast, and has a few added extra’s thrown in. Kinda like checkstyle, but at a design level that covers multiple classes and packages rather than individual source files.