Download JAR files tagged by compared with all dependencies

Jsgen is a Java Source Generation Framework: That means, it should be a valuable tool, if you intend to write a custom generator for Java sources. As such, it is the successor of a previous framework, called JaxMeJS (http://jaxme.sourceforge.net/JaxMeJS/docs/index.html). The predecessor came into being as a standalone project. It was incorporated into the bigger JaxMe project, when the latter was adopted by the Apache Webservices project. And it was buried as part of the bigger project, when the latter was moved to the Apache Attic (http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/webservices/archive/jaxme/). That was fine for quite some time, because the latest released version (JaxMeJS 0.5.2) did its job quite well. Over the years, however, the Java language has evolved, and the lack of support for features like Generics, or Annotations, became a burden. Hence the Successor: Jsgen picks up, where JaxMeJS ended. It is, however, a complete rewrite with several additional features, that the author considers to be important for modern Java applications: 1. It supports Generics. 2. It supports Annotations. 3. The builder pattern has been adopted. Almost all important classes are implemented as builders. This should make writing the actual source generators much more concise, and maintainable, than it used to be before. 4. The code style is configurable. Code styles allow you to concentrate on the actual work. The resulting Jave source will look nicely formatted, anyways. As of this writing, you can select between two builtin code styles: - The default code style is basically the authors personal free style, roughly comparable to the default code style of the Eclipse Java IDE. - As an alternative, there is also a Maven code style, which is widely used in the Open Source communities. Compared to the default style, it is less concise, if not even a bit verbose. On the other hand, it is widely adopted by projects in the vicinity of {{{https://maven.apache.org}Apache Maven}}. 5. Import lists are created, and sorted, automatically.

The OODT grid services (product and profile services) use CORBA or RMI as their underlying network transport. However, limitations of CORBA and RMI make them inappropriate for large-scale deployments. For one, both are procedural mechanisms, providing a remote interface that resembles a method call. This makes streaming of data from a service impossible, because there are limitations to the sizes of data structures that can be passed over a remote method call. Instead, repeated calls must be made to retrieve each block of a product, making transfer speeds horribly slow compared to HTTP or FTP. (Block-based retrieval of profiles was never implemented, resulting in out of memory conditions for large profile results, which is another problem.) Second, both CORBA and RMI rely on a central name registry. The registry makes an object independent of its network location, enabling a client to call it by name (looking up its last known location in the registry). However, this requires that server objects be able to make outbound network calls to the registry (through any outbound firewall), and that the registry accept those registrations (through any inbound firewall). This required administrative action at institutions hosting server objects and at the institution hosting the registry. Often, these firewall exceptions would change without notice as system adminstrators changed at each location (apparently firewall exceptions are poorly documented everywhere). Further, in the two major deployments of OODT (PDS and EDRN), server objects have almost never moved, nullifying any benefit of the registry. This project, OODT Web Grid Services, avoids the prolems of CORBA and RMI by using HTTP as the transport mechanism for products and profiles. Further, it provides a password-protected mechanism to add new sets of product and profile query handlers, enabling seamless activation of additional capabilities.

minitest provides a complete suite of testing facilities supporting TDD, BDD, mocking, and benchmarking. "I had a class with Jim Weirich on testing last week and we were allowed to choose our testing frameworks. Kirk Haines and I were paired up and we cracked open the code for a few test frameworks... I MUST say that minitest is *very* readable / understandable compared to the 'other two' options we looked at. Nicely done and thank you for helping us keep our mental sanity." -- Wayne E. Seguin minitest/unit is a small and incredibly fast unit testing framework. It provides a rich set of assertions to make your tests clean and readable. minitest/spec is a functionally complete spec engine. It hooks onto minitest/unit and seamlessly bridges test assertions over to spec expectations. minitest/benchmark is an awesome way to assert the performance of your algorithms in a repeatable manner. Now you can assert that your newb co-worker doesn't replace your linear algorithm with an exponential one! minitest/mock by Steven Baker, is a beautifully tiny mock (and stub) object framework. minitest/pride shows pride in testing and adds coloring to your test output. I guess it is an example of how to write IO pipes too. :P minitest/unit is meant to have a clean implementation for language implementors that need a minimal set of methods to bootstrap a working test suite. For example, there is no magic involved for test-case discovery. "Again, I can't praise enough the idea of a testing/specing framework that I can actually read in full in one sitting!" -- Piotr Szotkowski Comparing to rspec: rspec is a testing DSL. minitest is ruby. -- Adam Hawkins, "Bow Before MiniTest" minitest doesn't reinvent anything that ruby already provides, like: classes, modules, inheritance, methods. This means you only have to learn ruby to use minitest and all of your regular OO practices like extract-method refactorings still apply.