Search Results

Search found 1493 results on 60 pages for 'inheritance'.

Page 14/60 | < Previous Page | 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21  | Next Page >

  • Inheritance concept in jpa

    - by megala
    I created one table using Inheritance concept to sore data into google app engine datastore. It contained following coding but it shows error.How to user Inheritance concept.What error in my program Program 1: @Entity @Inheritance(strategy=InheritanceType.JOINED) public class calender { @Id private String EmailId; @Basic private String CalName; @Basic public void setEmailId(String emailId) { EmailId = emailId; } public String getEmailId() { return EmailId; } public void setCalName(String calName) { CalName = calName; } public String getCalName() { return CalName; } public calender(String EmailId,String CalName) { this.EmailId=EmailId; this.CalName=CalName; } } program 2: @Entity public class method { @Id private String method; public void setMethod(String method) { this.method = method; } public String getMethod() { return method; } public method(String method) { this.method=method; } } My constraint is I want ouput like this Calendertable coantain Emailid calenername and method table contain Emailid method How to achive this? thanks inadvance.

    Read the article

  • C++ code visualization

    - by bobobobo
    A sort of follow up/related question to this. I'm trying to get a grip on a large code base that has hundreds and hundreds of classes and a large inheritance hierarchy. I want to be able to see the "main veins" of the inheritance hierarchy at a glance - not all the "peripheral" classes that only do some very specific / specialized thing. Visual Studio's "View Class Diagram" makes something that looks like a train and its sprawled horizontally across the screen and isn't very organized. You can't grok it easily. I've just tried doxygen and graphviz but the results are .. somewhat similar to Visual Studio. I'm getting sweet looking call graphs but again too much detail for what I'm trying to get. I need a quick way to generate the inheritance hierarchy, in some kind of collapsible view.

    Read the article

  • Log4r : logger inheritance, yaml configuration, alternatives ?

    - by devlearn
    Hello, I'm pretty new to ruby environments and I was looking for a nice logging framework to use it my ruby and rails applications. In my previous experiences I have successfully used log4j and log4p (the perl port) and was expecting the same level of usability (and maturity) with log4r. However I must say that there are a number of things that are not clear at all in the log4r framework. 1 Logger Inheritance The logger inheritance does not seem to be managed at all ! If I declare a logger named 'myapp' and then try to get a logger name 'myapp::engine', the lookup will end with a NameError. I would expect that the framework returns the root logger according to the naming scheme and to use the 'myapp' logger. Q1 : Of course I can work around this and manage the names by myself with a lookup method, however is there a cleaner way to do this without any extra coding ? 2 YAML configuration Second thing that confuses me is the yaml configuration. On the log4r site there are literally no information about this system, the doc links forward to missing pages, so all the info I can find about is contained in the examples directory of the gem. I was pretty confused with the fact that the yaml configuration must contain the pre_config section, and that I need to define my own levels. If I remove the pre_config secion, or replace all the “custom” levels by the standard ones ( debug, info, warn, fatal ) , the example will throw the following error : log4r/yamlconfigurator.rb:68:in `decode_yaml': Log level must be in 0..7 (ArgumentError) So there seems to be no way of using a simple file where we only declare the loggers and appenders for the framework. Q2 : I realy think that I missed something and that must be a way of providing a simple yaml conf file. Do you have any examples of such an usage ? 3 Variables substitution in XML file Q3 : The Yaml configuration system seems to provide such a feature however I was unable to find a similar feature with XML files. Any ideas ? 4 Alternatives ? I must say that I'm very disappointed by the feature level and the maturity of log4r compared to the log4j and other log4j ports. I run into this framework with a solid background of logging APIs in other languages and find myself working around in all kinds just to make 'basic things' running in a “real world application”. By that I mean a complex application composed of several gems, console/scripting apps, and a rails web front end where the configuration must be mutualized and where we make intensive usage of namespaces and inheritance. I've run several searches in order to find something more suitable or mature, but did not find anything similar. Q4 : Do you guys know any (serious) alternatives to log4r framework that could be used in a enterprise class app ? Thanks reading all of this ! I'd really appreciate any pointers, Kind Regards,

    Read the article

  • How to perform insert and update with Ado.net dataservices (EF and Inheritance)

    - by Thurein
    Hi, I have an entity model, in which I have a table per type inheritance. There are 3 types, first, Contact, which I defined as abstract in my EF model and the rest are Company and person types which are derived from contact type. Is it possible to perform an insert using ado.net dataservice and asp.net ajax library? I was trying the following client code : dataContext.insertEntity(person, "Contacts"); I was getting this response from server : Error processing request stream. Type information must be specified for types that take part in inheritance. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Fixtures and inheritance in Symfony

    - by Tere
    Hi! I have a database schema in Symfony like this: Persona: actAs: { Timestampable: ~ } columns: primer_nombre: { type: string(255), notnull: true } segundo_nombre: { type: string(255) } apellido: { type: string(255), notnull: true } rut: { type: string(255) } email: { type: string(255) } email2: { type: string(255) } direccion: { type: string(400) } ciudad: { type: string(255) } region: { type: string(255) } pais: { type: string(255) } telefono: { type: string(255) } telefono2: { type: string(255) } fecha_nacimiento: { type: date } Alumno: inheritance: type: concrete extends: Persona columns: comentario: { type: string(255) } estado_pago: { type: string(255) } Alumno_Beca: columns: persona_id: { type: integer, primary: true } beca_id: { type: integer, primary: true } relations: Alumno: { onDelete: CASCADE, local: persona_id, foreign: id } Beca: { onDelete: CASCADE, local: beca_id, foreign: id } Beca: columns: nombre: { type: string(255) } monto: { type: double } porcentaje: { type: double } descripcion: { type: string(5000) } As you see, "alumno" has a concrete inheritance from "persona". Now I'm trying to create fixtures for this two tables, and I can't make Doctrine to load them. It gives me this error: SQLSTATE[23000]: Integrity constraint violation: 1452 Cannot add or update a child row: a foreign key constraint fails (eat/alumno__beca, CONSTRAINT alumno__beca_persona_id_alumno_id FOREIGN KEY (persona_id) REFERENCES alumno (id) ON DELETE CASCADE) Does someone know how to write a fixture for a table inherited from another? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • GetProperties() to return all properties for an interface inheritance hierarchy

    - by sduplooy
    Assuming the following hypothetical inheritance hierarchy: public interface IA { int ID { get; set; } } public interface IB : IA { string Name { get; set; } } Using reflection and making the following call: typeof(IB).GetProperties(BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.Instance) will only yield the properties of interface IB, which is "Name". If we were to do a similar test on the following code, public abstract class A { public int ID { get; set; } } public class B : A { public string Name { get; set; } } the call typeof(B).GetProperties(BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.Instance) will return an array of PropertyInfo objects for "ID" and "Name". Is there an easy way to find all the properties in the inheritance hierarchy for interfaces as in the first example?

    Read the article

  • JavaScript inheritance

    - by Tower
    Hi, Douglas Crockford seems to like the following inheritance approach: if (typeof Object.create !== 'function') { Object.create = function (o) { function F() {} F.prototype = o; return new F(); }; } newObject = Object.create(oldObject); It looks OK to me, but how does it differ from John Resig's simple inheritance approach? Basically it goes down to newObject = Object.create(oldObject); versus newObject = Object.extend(); And I am interested in theories. Implementation wise there does not seem to be much difference.

    Read the article

  • Dynamic dispatch and inheritance in python

    - by Bill Zimmerman
    Hi, I'm trying to modify Guido's multimethod (dynamic dispatch code): http://www.artima.com/weblogs/viewpost.jsp?thread=101605 to handle inheritance and possibly out of order arguments. e.g. (inheritance problem) class A(object): pass class B(A): pass @multimethod(A,A) def foo(arg1,arg2): print 'works' foo(A(),A()) #works foo(A(),B()) #fails Is there a better way than iteratively checking for the super() of each item until one is found? e.g. (argument ordering problem) I was thinking of this from a collision detection standpoint. e.g. foo(Car(),Truck()) and foo(Truck(), Car()) and should both trigger foo(Car,Truck) # Note: @multimethod(Truck,Car) will throw an exception if @multimethod(Car,Truck) was registered first? I'm looking specifically for an 'elegant' solution. I know that I could just brute force my way through all the possibilities, but I'm trying to avoid that. I just wanted to get some input/ideas before sitting down and pounding out a solution. Thanks

    Read the article

  • How to specify a different column for a @Inheritance JPA annotation

    - by Cue
    @Entity @Inheritance(strategy = InheritanceType.JOINED) public class Foo @Entity @Inheritance(strategy = InheritanceType.JOINED) public class BarFoo extends Foo mysql> desc foo; +---------------+-------------+ | Field | Type | +---------------+-------------+ | id | int | +---------------+-------------+ mysql> desc barfoo; +---------------+-------------+ | Field | Type | +---------------+-------------+ | id | int | | foo_id | int | | bar_id | int | +---------------+-------------+ mysql> desc bar; +---------------+-------------+ | Field | Type | +---------------+-------------+ | id | int | +---------------+-------------+ Is it possible to specify column barfo.foo_id as the joined column? Are you allowed to specify barfoo.id as BarFoo's @Id since you are overriding the getter/seeter of class Foo? I understand the schematics behind this relationship (or at least I think I do) and I'm ok with them. The reason I want an explicit id field for BarFoo is exactly because I want to avoid using a joined key (foo _id, bar _id) when querying for BarFoo(s) or when used in a "stronger" constraint. (as Ruben put it)

    Read the article

  • How to convert EER to SQL Table?

    - by Khajavi
    I have no problem with converting ER to SQL tables, but I don't know how can I convert EER to SQL tables? as you Know that EER has "is a" specification and inheritance, but I don't know how relational databases can connect with inheritance specification

    Read the article

  • JPA - Can I create an Entity class, using an @DiscriminatorValue, that doesn't have its own table?

    - by DaveyDaveDave
    Hi - this is potentially a bit complex, so I'll do my best to describe my situation - it's also my first post here, so please forgive formatting mistakes, etc! I'm using JPA with joined inheritance and a database structure that looks like: ACTION --------- ACTION_ID ACTION_MAPPING_ID ACTION_TYPE DELIVERY_CHANNEL_ACTION -------------------------- ACTION_ID CHANNEL_ID OVERRIDE_ADDRESS_ACTION -------------------------- ACTION_ID (various fields specific to this action type) So, in plain English, I have multiple different types of action, all share an ACTION_MAPPING, which is referenced from the 'parent' ACTION table. DELIVERY_CHANNEL_ACTION and OVERRIDE_ADDRESS_ACTION both have extra, supplementary data of their own, and are mapped to ACTION with a FK. Real-world, I also have a 'suppress' action, but this doesn't have any supplementary data of its own, so it doesn't have a corresponding table - all it needs is an ACTION_MAPPING, which is stored in the ACTION table. Hopefully you're with me so far... I'm creating a new project from scratch, so am pretty flexible in what I can do, but obviously would like to get it right from the outset! My current implementation, which works, has three entities loosely defined as follows: @Entity @Table(name="ACTION") @Inheritance(strategy=InheritanceType.JOINED) @DiscriminatorValue("SUPPRESS") public class Action @Entity @Table(name="DELIVERY_CHANNEL_ACTION") @DiscriminatorValue("DELIVERY_CHANNEL") public class DeliveryChannelAction extends Action @Entity @Table(name="OVERRIDE_ADDRESS_ACTION") @DiscriminatorValue("OVERRIDE_ADDRESS") public class OverrideAddressAction extends Action That is - I have a concrete base class, Action, with a Joined inheritance strategy. DeliveryChannelAction and OverrideAddressAction both extend Action. What feels wrong here though, is that my Action class is the base class for these two actions, but also forms the concrete implementation for the suppress action. For the time being this works, but at some point more actions are likely to be added, and there's every chance that some of them will, like SUPPRESS, have no supplementary data, which will start to get difficult! So... what I would like to do, in the object model world, is to have Action be abstract, and create a SuppressAction class, which is empty apart from having a @DiscriminatorValue("SUPPRESS"). I've tried doing exactly what is described above, so, changing Action to: @Entity @Table(name="ACTION") @Inheritance(strategy=InheritanceType.JOINED) public abstract class Action and creating: @DiscriminatorValue("SUPPRESS") public class SuppressAction extends Action but no luck - it seems to work fine for DeliveryChannelAction and OverrideAddressAction, but when I try to create a SuppressAction and persist it, I get: java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: Object: com.mypackage.SuppressAction[actionId=null] is not a known entity type. at org.eclipse.persistence.internal.sessions.UnitOfWorkImpl.registerNewObjectForPersist(UnitOfWorkImpl.java:4147) at org.eclipse.persistence.internal.jpa.EntityManagerImpl.persist(EntityManagerImpl.java:368) at com.mypackage.test.util.EntityTestUtil.createSuppressAction(EntityTestUtil.java:672) at com.mypackage.entities.ActionTest.testCRUDAction(ActionTest.java:27) which I assume is down to the fact that SuppressAction isn't registered as an entity, but I don't know how I can do that, given that it doesn't have an associated table. Any pointers, either complete answers or hints for things to Google (I'm out of ideas!), most welcome :) EDIT: to correct my stacktrace.

    Read the article

  • Data Annotations validation Built into model

    - by Josh
    I want to build an object model that automatically wires in validation when I attempt to save an object. I am using DataAnnotations for my validation, and it all works well, but I think my inheritance is whacked. I am looking here for some guidance on a better way to wire in my validation. So, to build in validation I have this interface public interface IValidatable { bool IsValid { get; } ValidationResponse ValidationResults { get; } void Validate(); } Then, I have a base class that all my objects inherit from. I did a class because I wanted to wire in the validation calls automatically. The issue is that the validation has to know the type of the class is it validating. So I use Generics like so. public class CoreObjectBase<T> : IValidatable where T : CoreObjectBase<T> { #region IValidatable Members public virtual bool IsValid { get { // First, check rules that always apply to this type var result = new Validator<T>().Validate((T)this); // return false if any violations occurred return !result.HasViolations; } } public virtual ValidationResponse ValidationResults { get { var result = new Validator<T>().Validate((T)this); return result; } } public virtual void Validate() { // First, check rules that always apply to this type var result = new Validator<T>().Validate((T)this); // throw error if any violations were detected if (result.HasViolations) throw new RulesException(result.Errors); } #endregion } So, I have this circular inheritance statement. My classes look like this then: public class MyClass : CoreObjectBase<MyClass> { } But the problem occurs when I have a more complicated model. Because I can only inherit from one class, when I have a situation where inheritance makes sense I believe the child classes won't have validation on their properties. public class Parent : CoreObjectBase<Parent> { //properties validated } public class Child : Parent { //properties not validated? } I haven't really tested the validation in these cases yet, but I am pretty sure that anything in child with a data annotation on it will not be automatically validated when I call Child.Validate(); due to the way the inheritance is configured. Is there a better way to do this?

    Read the article

  • Django forms, inheritance and order of form fields

    - by Hannson
    I'm using Django forms in my website and would like to control the order of the fields. Here's how I define my forms: class edit_form(forms.Form): summary = forms.CharField() description = forms.CharField(widget=forms.TextArea) class create_form(edit_form): name = forms.CharField() The name is immutable and should only be listed when the entity is created. I use inheritance to add consistency and DRY principles. What happens which is not erroneous, in fact totally expected, is that the name field is listed last in the view/html but I'd like the name field to be on top of summary and description. I do realize that I could easily fix it by copying summary and description into create_form and loose the inheritance but I'd like to know if this is possible. Why? Imagine you've got 100 fields in edit_form and have to add 10 fields on the top in create_form - copying and maintaining the two forms wouldn't look so sexy then. (This is not my case, I'm just making up an example) So, how can I override this behavior? Edit: Apparently there's no proper way to do this without going through nasty hacks (fiddling with .field attribute). The .field attribute is a SortedDict (one of Django's internal datastructures) which doesn't provide any way to reorder key:value pairs. It does how-ever provide a way to insert items at a given index but that would move the items from the class members and into the constructor. This method would work, but make the code less readable. The only other way I see fit is to modify the framework itself which is less-than-optimal in most situations. In short the code would become something like this: class edit_form(forms.Form): summary = forms.CharField() description = forms.CharField(widget=forms.TextArea) class create_form(edit_form): def __init__(self,*args,**kwargs): forms.Form.__init__(self,*args,**kwargs) self.fields.insert(0,'name',forms.CharField()) That shut me up :)

    Read the article

  • user inheritance in django

    - by amateur
    Hi guys, I saw a couple of ways extending user information of users and decided to adopt the model inheritance method. for instance, I have : class Parent(User): contact_means = models.IntegerField() is_staff = False objects = userManager() Now it is done, I've downloaded django_registration to help me out with sending emails to new users. The thing is, instead of using registration forms to register new user, I want to to invoke the email sending/acitvation capability of django_registration. So my workflow is: 1. add new Parent object in admin page. 2. send email My problem is, the django-registration creates a new registration profile together with a new user in the user table. how do I tweak this such that I am able to add the user entry into the custom user table. I have tried to create a modelAdmin and alter the save_model method to launch the create_inactive_user from django_registration, however I do not how to save the user object generated from django_registration into my Parent table when I have using model inheritance and I do not have a Foreign key attribute in my parent model.

    Read the article

  • Django's post_save signal behaves weirdly with models using multi-table inheritance

    - by hekevintran
    Django's post_save signal behaves weirdly with models using multi-table inheritance I am noticing an odd behavior in the way Django's post_save signal works when using a model that has multi-table inheritance. I have these two models: class Animal(models.Model): category = models.CharField(max_length=20) class Dog(Animal): color = models.CharField(max_length=10) I have a post save callback called echo_category: def echo_category(sender, **kwargs): print "category: '%s'" % kwargs['instance'].category post_save.connect(echo_category, sender=Dog) I have this fixture: [ { "pk": 1, "model": "animal.animal", "fields": { "category": "omnivore" } }, { "pk": 1, "model": "animal.dog", "fields": { "color": "brown" } } ] In every part of the program except for in the post_save callback the following is true: from animal.models import Dog Dog.objects.get(pk=1).category == u'omnivore' # True When I run syncdb and the fixture is installed, the echo_category function is run. The output from syncdb is: $ python manage.py syncdb --noinput Installing json fixture 'initial_data' from '~/my_proj/animal/fixtures'. category: '' Installed 2 object(s) from 1 fixture(s) The weird thing here is that the dog object's category attribute is an empty string. Why is it not 'omnivore' like it is everywhere else? As a temporary (hopefully) workaround I reload the object from the database in the post_save callback: def echo_category(sender, **kwargs): instance = kwargs['instance'] instance = sender.objects.get(pk=instance.pk) print "category: '%s'" % instance.category post_save.connect(echo_category, sender=Dog) This works but it is not something I like because I must remember to do it when the model inherits from another model and it must hit the database again. The other weird thing is that I must do instance.pk to get the primary key. The normal 'id' attribute does not work (I cannot use instance.id). I do not know why this is. Maybe this is related to the reason why the category attribute is not doing the right thing?

    Read the article

  • Design pattern to use instead of multiple inheritance

    - by mizipzor
    Coming from a C++ background, Im used to multiple inheritance. I like the feeling of a shotgun squarely aimed at my foot. Nowadays, I work more in C# and Java, where you can only inherit one baseclass but implement any number of interfaces (did I get the terminology right?). For example, lets consider two classes that implement a common interface but different (yet required) baseclasses: public class TypeA : CustomButtonUserControl, IMagician { public void DoMagic() { // ... } } public class TypeB : CustomTextUserControl, IMagician { public void DoMagic() { // ... } } Both classes are UserControls so I cant substitute the base class. Both needs to implement the DoMagic function. My problem now is that both implementations of the function are identical. And I hate copy-and-paste code. The (possible) solutions: I naturally want TypeA and TypeB to share a common baseclass, where I can write that identical function definition just once. However, due to having the limit of just one baseclass, I cant find a place along the hierarchy where it fits. One could also try to implement a sort of composite pattern. Putting the DoMagic function in a separate helper class, but the function here needs (and modifies) quite a lot of internal variables/fields. Sending them all as (reference) parameters would just look bad. My gut tells me that the adapter pattern could have a place here, some class to convert between the two when necessery. But it also feels hacky. I tagged this with language-agnostic since it applies to all languages that use this one-baseclass-many-interfaces approach. Also, please point out if I seem to have misunderstood any of the patterns I named. In C++ I would just make a class with the private fields, that function implementation and put it in the inheritance list. Whats the proper approach in C#/Java and the like?

    Read the article

  • Problem with 2 levels of inheritance in hibernate mapping

    - by Seth
    Here's my class structure: class A class B extends A class C extends A class D extends C class E extends C And here are my mappings (class bodies omitted for brevity): Class A: @Entity @Inheritance(strategy=InheritanceType.SINGLE_TABLE) @MappedSuperclass @DiscriminatorColumn( name="className", discriminatorType=DiscriminatorType.STRING ) @ForceDiscriminator public abstract class A Class B: @Entity @DiscriminatorValue("B") public class B extends A Class C: @Entity @DiscriminatorValue("C") @MappedSuperclass @DiscriminatorColumn( name="cType", discriminatorType=DiscriminatorType.STRING ) @ForceDiscriminator public abstract class C extends A Class D: @Entity @DiscriminatorValue("D") public class D extends C Class E: @Entity @DiscriminatorValue("E") public class E extends C I've got a class F that contains a set of A: @Entity public class F { ... @OneToMany(fetch=FetchType.LAZY, cascade=CascadeType.ALL) @JoinTable( name="F_A", joinColumns = @JoinColumn(name="A_ID"), inverseJoinColumns = @JoinColumn(name="F_ID") ) private Set<A> aSet = new HashSet<A>(); ... The problem is that whenever I add a new E instance to aSet and then call session.saveOrUpdate(fInstance), hibernate saves with "A" as the discrimiator string. When I try to access the aSet in the F instance, I get the following exception (full stacktrace ommitted for brevity): org.hibernate.InstantiationException: Cannot instantiate abstract class or interface: path.to.class.A Am I mapping the classes incorrectly? How am I supposed to map multiple levels of inheritance? Thanks for the help!

    Read the article

  • Map inheritance from generic class in Linq To SQL

    - by Ksenia Mukhortova
    Hi everyone, I'm trying to map my inheritance hierarchy to DB using Linq to SQL: Inheritance is like this, classes are POCO, without any LINQ to SQL attributes: public interface IStage { ... } public abstract class SimpleStage<T> : IStage where T : Process { ... } public class ConcreteStage : SimpleStage<ConcreteProcess> { ... } Here is the mapping: <Database Name="NNN" xmlns="http://schemas.microsoft.com/linqtosql/mapping/2007"> <Table Name="dbo.Stage" Member="Stage"> <Type Name="BusinessLogic.Domain.IStage"> <Column Name="ID" Member="ID" DbType="Int NOT NULL IDENTITY" IsPrimaryKey="true" IsDbGenerated="true" AutoSync="OnInsert" /> <Column Name="StageType" Member="StageType" IsDiscriminator="true" /> <Type Name="BusinessLogic.Domain.SimpleStage" IsInheritanceDefault="true"> <Type Name="BusinessLogic.Domain.ConcreteStage" IsInheritanceDefault="true" InheritanceCode="1"/> </Type> </Type> </Table> </Database> In the runtime I get error: System.InvalidOperationException was unhandled Message="Mapping Problem: Cannot find runtime type for type mapping 'BusinessLogic.Domain.SimpleStage'." Neither specifying SimpleStage, nor SimpleStage<T> in mapping file helps - runtime keeps producing different types of errors. DC is created like this: StreamReader sr = new StreamReader(@"MappingFile.map"); XmlMappingSource mapping = XmlMappingSource.FromStream(sr.BaseStream); DataContext dc = new DataContext(@"connection string", mapping); If Linq to SQL doesn't support this, could you, please, advise some other ORM, which does. Thanks in advance, Regards! Ksenia

    Read the article

  • Which one of the following is NOT a pitfall of inheritance?

    - by Difficult PEOPLE
    Which one of the following is NOT a pitfall of inheritance? Base-derive classes should be totally separate and do not have an is-a relationship. Base-derive classes should have been aggregate classes instead. Inheritance may be inverted, example: Truck<-Vehicle should be Vehicle<-Truck. Incompatible class hierarchies may be connected because of multiple inheritance. Aggregation should have been used instead. Functionality is transferred from a base class to a derived one. In my opinion, NOT a pitfall of inheritance meas can use inheritance. 1 seems do without inheritance 2 aggregate substitute Base-derive I don't know So, I think 5 is the answer.

    Read the article

  • Disadvantage of OOP?

    - by Bragaadeesh
    Typically i dont want to know the specifics of the cons of OOPs, but it felt kind of weird when I had an argument at an interview I attended recently. The question that was posted to me was to tell me one disadvantage of OOP (Object Oriented Programming). At that time, I felt OOP to be the most matured level of programming after the procedural/functional models. So I replied to him that I dont see any negatives at all. But the interviewer said there are few and I asked him to list one if he does not mind. He gave an example that I cant digest well, he said that OOP pattern does not strictly implement inheritance rules and cited the satellite/rocket example where the body parts will disintegrate periodically to remove weight during rocket launch and said that inheritance does not support this. His example kind of felt very weird to me the reason being the application of inheritance to this example. Then I left the example aside and I had this doubt - Can we unplug class hierarchies in such a manner (I am kind of confident in Java its not possible) in an ideal Object Oriented Design?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21  | Next Page >