Re: [orbit-dev] Orbit's stance on uses directives

[Andreas Sewe <andreas.sewe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi David,

> I think our "stance" if we have one, is if it is known to be important,
> to take advantage of it.
> That is,  you can and should open a bug to add it to in the specific
> bundle(s) where you think its important.

will do so.

> Its a vague memory, but I seem to recall someone saying long ago we
> probably did not want to
> always use it for every bundle, just out of routine, since it might have
> a negative impact on
> performance ... especially in cases where projects/products had a huge
> number of bundles.

Yes, IIRC, the constraint solving required during bundle wiring can be
of exponential complexity (reduces to SAT).

> Does that help? Or are you saying every bundle would have have to do it,
> to help your use-case?

No. Libraries like Guava, GSON, or the Apache Commons stuff would
probably benefit the most. These are IMHO more likely to be
Import-Package'd than Require-Bundle'd, as their types often end up in
other APIs (com.google.common.base.Optional being the canonical example
here at Eclipse Code Recommenders) and you don't want to force the
Require-Bundle upon all the consumers of that API (re-export). But
Import-Package really one works with proper uses directives in place.

Anyways, I'll do a bug report with a clear example showing how and why
things break for a given Orbit bundle.

Kind regards,

Andreas
-- 
Codetrails UG (haftungsbeschränkt)
The knowledge transfer company

Robert-Bosch-Str. 7, 64293 Darmstadt
Mobile: +49-170-811-3791
http://www.codetrails.com/

Managing Director: Dr. Marcel Bruch
Handelsregister: Darmstadt HRB 91940