 |
BorlandTalk.com
Borland discussion newsgroups
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Jim Cooper
Guest
|
 Posted: Tue Dec 21, 2004 3:30 pm Post subject: Re: Patterns |
 |
|
| Quote: | Explaining things via patterns make things even more
abstract
|
But that's the whole point :-)
| Quote: | and the high abstraction level is IMHO one of the major problems
with OO.
|
Eh? What do you mean?
| Quote: | E.g. the "Visitor" pattern should normally not lead to classes named
xxxVisitorxxx.
|
Errr, why not? It does for me (for at least the base Visitor class) :-)
Cheers,
Jim Cooper
_______________________________________________
Jim Cooper [email]jim (AT) falafelsoft (DOT) com[/email]
Falafel Software http://www.falafelsoft.com
_______________________________________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Charles McAllister
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 21, 2004 10:04 pm Post subject: Re: Patterns |
|
|
Bjørge Sæther wrote:
| Quote: | E.g. the "Visitor" pattern should normally not lead to classes named
xxxVisitorxxx. It's an abstract term to give you ideas, not a design
methodology.
All IMHO, of course 
|
i usually include the name of the pattern with the name of the class. i think it helps others who
read my code identify relationships between classes faster.
for example, if something is a singleton, i name it TFooSingleton
anyone could see then that it isn't necessary to free TFooSingleton w/ out having to look at the
implementation. my 2 cents.
Charles
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
