Search Results

Search found 658 results on 27 pages for 'oo'.

Page 22/27 | < Previous Page | 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27  | Next Page >

• Preparing for a C#, ASP.NET, JavaScript interview

  - by halivingston

  I have an interview I'm prepping for, I've written A LOT of code, specifically in C# and ASP.NET. I've written fair amounts of JavaScript, but no OO stuff in it. So I'm definately going to brush up on that. I remember for a previous job interview, I was asked Java questions, like not super intricate, but detailed stuff. Now I'm looking for a book maybe that I can read through in a day (or two) and known all the crannies of C#, ASP.NET and JavaScript. Different books obviously I'll be honest, for the Java interview, I actually read The J2EE certification book, and it helped A LOT!

  Read the article

• contain new elements of an "instance" in javascript

  - by iamnotmad

  Hi, so I know there are tons of ways to simulate inheritance and other OO features. I have chosen one to use for my project and am wondering if I can create an instance and add stuff to it and keep it contained (within braces). Consider the following: function BaseClass(){ <this.stuff here> } function SubClass(){ this.superClass = BaseClass(); this.superClass(); <this.other stuff here> } myObj = new SubClass(); so myObj is an instance of SubClass. I can add things to myObj like: myObj.blah = "funtimes"; What I would like is to be able to add stuff to the "instance" and keep it organized in braces much like the constructor. psuedo code like: myObj = new SubClass() { var blah = "funtimes" <more instance specific stuff here> } Is something like this possible? Thanks!

  Read the article

• Simple OOP-related question.

  - by M4design

  This question came to my mind quite a few times. Let my explain my question through an example. Say I've got two classes: 1- Grid. 2- Cell. Now the location of the cell 'should' be stored in the grid class, not in the cell class itself. Say that the cell wanted to get its location through a method in the grid. How can it do that? Keep in mind that the cell was created/initialised by the Grid class. What good OO approach to solve this problem? Thank you

  Read the article

• Querying associated images in one table after querying products from another

  - by Andy

  I used this code to connect to a database and fetch results. This worked perfectly until i tried to work in another query to the images table to get associated images. I'm not very experienced with OO programming. So hopefully someone can see where ive gone wrong and help me out. <?php global $__CMS_CONN__; $sql = "SELECT * FROM ecom_products"; $stmt = $__CMS_CONN__->prepare($sql); $stmt->execute(array($id)); while ($row = $stmt->fetchObject()) { $imagesql = "SELECT * FROM ecom_product_images where id = $row->id && where primaryImage = '1'"; $imagestmt = $__CMS_CONN__->prepare($sql); $imagestmt->execute(array($id)); $imageName = $imagestmt->fetchObject(); echo '<a href="'.URL_PUBLIC.$row->id.'">'.$row->productNm.'</a>'.$imageName; } ?>

  Read the article

• Are C++ Templates just Macros in disguise?

  - by Roddy

  I've been programming in C++ for a few years, and I've used STL quite a bit and have created my own template classes a few times to see how it's done. Now I'm trying to integrate templates deeper into my OO design, and a nagging thought keeps coming back to me: They're just a macros, really... You could implement (rather UGLY) auto_ptrs using #defines, if you really wanted to. This way of thinking about templates helps me understand how my code will actually work, but I feel that I must be missing the point somehow. Macros are meant evil incarnate, yet "template metaprogramming" is all the rage. So, what ARE the real distinctions? and how can templates avoid the dangers that #define leads you into, like Inscrutable compiler errors in places where you don't expect them? Code bloat? Difficulty in tracing code? Setting Debugger Breakpoints?

  Read the article

• Why are Objective-C instance variables declared in an interface?

  - by Chase

  I'm just getting into Objective-C (Java is my primary OO language). Defining an object's instance variables in the interface instead of the class seems strange. I'm used to an interface being a public API definition with nothing besides method signatures (not counting constants here). Is there some reason that state is defined in an interface (even if it is private) and behaviour is defined in a class. It just seems odd that since objects are state+behavior that the definition would be split into two separate places. Is it a design benefit is some way? A pain in the rear issue that you are just forced to deal with in Objective-C? A non-issue, just different? Any background on why it's done this way? Or can you put object state in a class and I just haven't hit that part in my book yet?

  Read the article

• What are the differences between struct and class in C++

  - by palm3D

  This question was already asked in the context of C#/.Net. Now I'd like to learn the differences between a struct and a class in (unmanaged) C++. Please discuss the technical differences as well as reasons for choosing one or the other in OO design. I'll start with an obvious difference: If you don't specify public: or private:, members of a struct are public by default; members of a class are private by default. I'm sure there are other differences to be found in the obscure corners of the C++ specification.

  Read the article

• Perl Email package

  - by aidan

  I'm looking for a simple (OO?) approach to email creation and sending. Something like $e = Email->new(to => "test <[email protected]>", from => "from <[email protected]>"); $e->plain_text($plain_version); $e->html($html_version); $e->attach_file($some_file_object); I've found Email::MIME::CreateHTML, which looks great in almost every way, except that it does not seem to support file attachments. Also, I'm considering writing these emails to a database and having a cronjob send them at a later date. This means that I would need a $e->as_text() sub to return the entire email, including attachments, as raw text which I could stuff into the db. And so I would then need a way of sending the raw emails - what would be a good way of achieving this? Many thanks

  Read the article

• Comma separated values in a database field

  - by John Doe

  I have a products table. Each row in that table corresponds to a single product and it's identified by a unique Id. Now each product can have multiple "codes" associated with that product. For example: Id | Code ---------------------- 0001 | IN,ON,ME,OH 0002 | ON,VI,AC,ZO 0003 | QA,PS,OO,ME What I'm trying to do is create a stored procedure so that I can pass in a codes like "ON,ME" and have it return every product that contains the "ON" or "ME" code. Since the codes are comma separated, I don't know how I can split those and search them. Is this possible using only TSQL? Edit: It's a mission critical table. I don't have the authority to change it.

  Read the article

• Avoiding sub-type selection in view code

  - by John Donoghue

  Hi, I have some code where the model contains some classes like (vb.net pseudocode, but could be any OO language): Enum AttributeType Boolean Date String End Enum MustInherit Class Attibute Must Override Function Type As AttributeType End Class Class BooleanAttribute: Attribute Function Type As AttributeType Return AttributeType.Boolean End Function End Class And the view contains some code like: Select Case AttributeType Case Boolean //Display checkbox control Case Date //Display date picker control Case String //Display textbox control End Select I don't really like the code in the view, for the hopefully obvious reasons (what happens when I get a new attribute type etc). My question is, how should I replace it? I could easily add a method to the concrete classes, but that pollutes the model with UI stuff so that's a horrible idea. I could move the select into a factory, but that seems to be just hiding the problem. Can anybody advise a better approach?

  Read the article

• Does this pattern have a name?

  - by LK7jb

  Disclaimer: I'm trying to learn proper OO programming/design, so I'm pretty new to this stuff. I guess this is a general design patterns question, but I'll base my example on a game engine or something that renders objects to the display. Consider the following: How can this sort of separation between physical objects (e.g., cubes, spheres, etc.) and the rendering mechanism be achieved in an extensible manner? This design is not set in stone, and perhaps I've got something wrong from the start. I'm just curious as to how a problem like this is solved in real world code.

  Read the article

• Should I put a try-finally block after every Object.Create?

  - by max

  I have a general question about best practice in OO Delphi. Currently, I put try-finally blocks anywhere I create an object to free that object after usage (to avoid memory leaks). E.g.: aObject := TObject.Create; try aOBject.AProcedure(); ... finally aObject.Free; end; instead of: aObject := TObject.Create; aObject.AProcedure(); .. aObject.Free; Do you think it is good practice, or too much overhead? And what about the performance?

  Read the article

• PHP mySQL query's and PHP Variables

  - by jon

  I'm trying to make an OO Login system for a project I'm working on, and am having trouble with inserting variables into the query strings. In the code below, if I replace "$TBL_NAME" with the actual table name it works. Why isn't $TBL_NAME translating to the value of $TBL_NAME? class UserDB { private $TBL_NAME = "users"; public static function CheckLogin($username, $password) { Database::Connect(); $username = stripslashes($username); $password = stripslashes($password); $username = mysql_real_escape_string($username); $password = mysql_real_escape_string($password); $sql="SELECT uid FROM $TBL_NAME WHERE username='$username' AND password='$password' "; $result =mysql_query($sql); $count=mysql_num_rows($result); if ($count==1) return true; else return false; } The Query is returning false.

  Read the article

• Writing a C++ wrapper for a C library

  - by stripes

  I have a legacy C library, written in an OO type form. Typical functions are like: LIB *lib_new(); void lib_free(LIB *lib); int lib_add_option(LIB *lib, int flags); void lib_change_name(LIB *lib, char *name); I'd like to use this library in my C++ program, so I'm thinking a C++ wrapper is required. The above would all seem to map to something like: class LIB { public: LIB(); ~LIB(); int add_option(int flags); void change_name(char *name); ... }; I've never written a C++ wrapper round C before, and can't find much advice about it. Is this a good/typical/sensible approach to creating a C++/C wrapper?

  Read the article

• What Design Pattern To Replace 'CurrentStep' Variable

  - by Rob P.

  Tried to search but didn't know how to phrase it. I've got some code that is essentially... Private CurMajorStep as Integer = 0 Private CurMinorStep as Integer = 0 Public Sub PerformNextStep() Select Case iMajorStep Case 0 ThingOne() Case 1 ThingTwo() Case 2 ThingThree() Case 3 ThingFour() Case 4 AnythingElse() Case 5 Finish() End Select End Sub And then, in some of those, the CurMinorStep keeps track of the current state of that particular 'step'. I hope that all makes sense. The code is messy and I know it's going to be problematic to maintain. Can someone point me to a clean OO pattern to handle this?

  Read the article

• try finally block around every Object.Create?

  - by max

  Hi, I have a general question about best practice in OO Delphi. Currently, I but a try finally block around everywhere, where I create an object, to free that object after usage (to avoid memory leaks). E.g.: aObject := TObject.Create; try aOBject.AProcedure(); ... finally aObject.Free; end; instead of: aObject := TObject.Create; aObject.AProcedure(); .. aObject.Free; To you think, it is good practice, or too much overhead? And what about the performance?

  Read the article

• .NET security mechanism to restrict access between two Types in the same Website project?

  - by jdk

  Question: Is there a mechanism in the .NET Framework to hide one custom Type from another without using separate projects/assemblies? I'm using C# with ASP.NET in a Website project (Note: Not a Web Application). Obviously there's not a way to enforce this restriction using language-specific OO keywords so I am looking for something else, for example: maybe a permission framework or code access mechanism, maybe something that uses meta data like Attributes. I'm unsure. I don't really care whether the solution actually hides classes from each other or just makes them inaccessible, etc. A runtime or design time answer will suffice. Looking for something easy to implement otherwise it's not worth the effort ... Background: I'm working in an ASP.NET Website project and the team has decided not to use separate project assemblies for different software layers. Therefore I'm looking for a way to have, for example, a DataAccess/ folder of which I disallow its classes to access other Types in the ASP.NET Website project.

  Read the article

• A toolset for self improvement and learning [closed]

  - by Sebastian

  Possible Duplicate: I’m having trouble learning I've been working as an IT consultant for 1½ years and I am very passionate about programming. Before that I studied MSc Software Engineering and had both a part time job as a developer for a big telecom company. During that time I also took extra courses and earned a SCJP certificate. I have been continuously reading a lot of books during the last 3½ years. Now to my problem. I want to continue learning and become a really, really good developer. Apart from my daytime job as a full time java developer I have taken university courses in, for me, new languages and paradigms. Most recently, android game development and then functional programming with Scala. I've read books, went to conferences and had a couple of presentations for internal training purposes in our local office. I want to have some advice from other people who have previously been in my situation or currently are. What are you guys doing to keep improving yourselves? Here is some things that I have found are working for me: Reading books I've mostly read books about best practices for programming, OO-design, refactoring, design patterns, tdd. Software craftmanship if you like. I keep a reading list and my current book is Apprenticeship patterns. Taking courses In my country we have a really good system for taking online distance courses. I have also taken one course at coursera.org and a highly recommend that platform. Ive looked at courses at oreilly.com, industriallogic, javaspecialists.eu and they seem to be okay. If someone gives these type of courses a really good review, I can probably convince my boss. Workshops that span over a couple of days would probably be harder, but Ive seen that uncle Bob will have one about refactoring and tdd in 6months not far from here.. :) Are their possibly some online learning platforms that I dont know about? Educational videos I've bought uncle bobs videos from cleancoders.com and I highly recommend them. The only thing I dont like is that they are quite expensive and that he talks about astronomy for ~10 minutes in every episode. Getting certified I had a lot of fun and learned a lot when I studied for the SCJP. I have also done some preparation for the microsoft equivalent but never went for it. I think it is a good when selling yourself as a newly graduated student and also will boost your knowledge if your are interested in it. Now I would like others to start sharing their experiences and possibly give me some advice! BR Sebastian

  Read the article

• Web application / Domain model integration using JSON capable DTOs [on hold]

  - by g-makulik

  I'm a bit confused about architectural choices for the web-applications/java/python world. For c/c++ world the available (open source) choices to implement web applications is pretty limited to zero, involving java or python the choices explode to a,- hard to sort out -, mess of available 'frameworks' and application approaches. I want to sort out a clean MVC model, where the M stands for a fully blown (POCO, POJO driven) domain model (according M.Fowler's EAA pattern) using a mature OO language (Java,C++) for implementation. The background is: I have a system with certain hardware components (that introduce system immanent active behavior) and a configuration database for system meta and HW-components configuration data (these are even usually self contained, since the HW-components are capable to persist their configuration data anyway). For realization of the configuration/status data exchange protocol with the HW-components we have chosen the Google Protobuf format, which works well for the directly wired communication with these components. This protocol is already used successfully with a Java based GUI application via TCP/IP connection to the main system controlling HW-component. This application has some drawbacks and design flaws for historical reasons. Now we want to develop an abstract model (domain model) for configuration and monitoring those HW-components, that represents a more use case oriented view to the overall system behavior. I have the feeling that a plain Java class model would fit best for this (c++ implementation seems to have too much implementation/integration overhead with viable language-bridge interfaces). Google Protobuf message definitions could still serve well to describe DTO objects used to interact with a domain model API. But integrating Google Protobuf messages client side for e.g. data binding in the current view doesn't seem to be a good choice. I'm thinking about some extra serialization features, e.g. for JSON based data exchange with the views/controllers. Most lightweight solutions seem to involve a python based presentation layer using JSON based data transfer (I'm at least not sure to be fully informed about this). Is there some lightweight (applicable for a limited ARM Linux platform) framework available, supporting such architecture to realize a web-application? UPDATE: According to my recent research and comments of colleagues I've noticed that using Java (and some JVM) might not be the preferable choice for integration with python on a limited linux system as we have (running on ARM9 with hard to discuss memory and MCU costs), but C/C++ modules would do well for this (since this forms the native interface to python extensions, doesn't it?). I can imagine to provide a domain model from an appropriate C/C++ API (though I still think it's more efforts and higher skill requirements for the involved developers to do with these languages). Still I'm searching for a good approach that supports such architecture. I'll appreciate any pointers!

  Read the article

• Duplication in parallel inheritance hierarchies

  - by flamingpenguin

  Using an OO language with static typing (like Java), what are good ways to represent the following model invariant without large amounts of duplication. I have two (actually multiple) flavours of the same structure. Each flavour requires its own (unique to that flavour data) on each of the objects within that structure as well as some shared data. But within each instance of the aggregation only objects of one (the same) flavour are allowed. FooContainer can contain FooSources and FooDestinations and associations between the "Foo" objects BarContainer can contain BarSources and BarDestinations and associations between the "Bar" objects interface Container() { List<? extends Source> sources(); List<? extends Destination> destinations(); List<? extends Associations> associations(); } interface FooContainer() extends Container { List<? extends FooSource> sources(); List<? extends FooDestination> destinations(); List<? extends FooAssociations> associations(); } interface BarContainer() extends Container { List<? extends BarSource> sources(); List<? extends BarDestination> destinations(); List<? extends BarAssociations> associations(); } interface Source { String getSourceDetail1(); } interface FooSource extends Source { String getSourceDetail2(); } interface BarSource extends Source { String getSourceDetail3(); } interface Destination { String getDestinationDetail1(); } interface FooDestination extends Destination { String getDestinationDetail2(); } interface BarDestination extends Destination { String getDestinationDetail3(); } interface Association { Source getSource(); Destination getDestination(); } interface FooAssociation extends Association { FooSource getSource(); FooDestination getDestination(); String getFooAssociationDetail(); } interface BarAssociation extends Association { BarSource getSource(); BarDestination getDestination(); String getBarAssociationDetail(); }

  Read the article

• Language Club

  - by Ben Griswold

  We started a language club at work this week.  Thus far, we have a collective interest in a number of languages: Python, Ruby, F#, Erlang, Objective-C, Scala, Clojure, Haskell and Go. There are more but these 9 received the most votes. During the first few meetings we are going to determine which language we should tackle first. To help make our selection, each member will provide a quick overview of their favored language by answering the following set of questions: Why are you interested in learning “your” language(s). (There’s lots of work, I’m an MS shill, It’s hip and  fun, etc) What type of language is it?  (OO, dynamic, functional, procedural, declarative, etc) What types of problems is your language best suited to solve?  (Algorithms over big data, rapid application development, modeling, merely academic, etc) Can you provide examples of where/how it is being used?  If it isn’t being used, why not?  (Erlang was invented at Ericsson to provide an extremely fault tolerant, concurrent system.) Quick history – Who created/sponsored the language?  When was it created?  Is it currently active? Does the language have hardware support (an attempt was made at one point to create processor instruction sets specific to Prolog), or can it run as an interpreted language inside another language (like Ruby in the JVM)? Are there facilities for programs written in this language to communicate with other languages?  How does this affect its utility? Does the language have a IDE tool support?  (Think Eclipse or Visual Studio) How well is the language supported in terms of books, community and documentation? What’s the number one things which differentiates the language from others?  (i.e. Why is it cool?) How is the language applicability to us as consultants?  What would the impact be of using the language in terms of cost, maintainability, personnel costs, etc.? What’s the number one things which differentiates the language from others?  (i.e. Why is it cool?) This should provide an decent introduction into nearly a dozen languages and give us enough context to decide which single language deserves our undivided attention for the weeks to come.  Stay tuned for the winner…

  Read the article

• Beginning with first project on game development [closed]

  - by Tsvetan

  Today is the day I am going to start my first real game project. It will be a Universe simulator. Basically, you can build anything from tiny meteor to quazars and universes. It is going to be my project for an olympiad in IT in my country and I really want to make it perfect(at least a bronze medal). So, I would like to ask some questions about organization and development methodologies. Firstly, my plan is to make a time schedule. In it I would write my plans for the next month or two(because that is the time I have). With this exact plan I hope to make my organisation at its best. Of course, if I am doing sth faster than the schedule I would involve more features for the game and/or continue with the tempo I have. Also, for the organisation I would make a basic pseudocode(maybe) and just rewrite it so it is compilable. Like a basic skeleton of everything. The last is an idea I tought of in the moment, but if it is good I will use it. Secondly, for the development methodologies, obviously, I think of making object-oriented code and make everything perfect(a lot of testing, good code, documentation etc.). Also, I am going to make my own menu system(I read that OpenGL hasn't got very good one). Maybe I would implement it with an xml file, holding the info about position of buttons, text boxes, images and everything. Maybe I would do a specific CSS for it and so on. I think that is very good way of doing the menu system, because it makes the presentation layer separate of the logic. But, if there is a better way, I would do it the better way. For the logic, well, I don't have much to say. OO code, testing, debuging, good and fast algorithms and so on. Also, a good documentation must be written and this is the area I need to make some research in. I think that is for now. I hope I have been enough descriptive. If more questions come on my mind, I will ask them. Edit: I think of blogging every part of the project, or at least writing down everything in a file or something like that. My question is: Is my plan of how to do everything around the project good? And if not, what is necessary to be improved and what other things I can involve for making the project good.

  Read the article

• Basis of definitions

  - by Yttrill

  Let us suppose we have a set of functions which characterise something: in the OO world methods characterising a type. In mathematics these are propositions and we have two kinds: axioms and lemmas. Axioms are assumptions, lemmas are easily derived from them. In C++ axioms are pure virtual functions. Here's the problem: there's more than one way to axiomatise a system. Given a set of propositions or methods, a subset of the propositions which is necessary and sufficient to derive all the others is called a basis. So too, for methods or functions, we have a desired set which must be defined, and typically every one has one or more definitions in terms of the others, and we require the programmer to provide instance definitions which are sufficient to allow all the others to be defined, and, if there is an overspecification, then it is consistent. Let me give an example (in Felix, Haskell code would be similar): class Eq[t] { virtual fun ==(x:t,y:t):bool => eq(x,y); virtual fun eq(x:t, y:t)=> x == y; virtual fun != (x:t,y:t):bool => not (x == y); axiom reflex(x:t): x == x; axiom sym(x:t, y:t): (x == y) == (y == x); axiom trans(x:t, y:t, z:t): implies(x == y and y == z, x == z); } Here it is clear: the programmer must define either == or eq or both. If both are defined, the definitions must be equivalent. Failing to define one doesn't cause a compiler error, it causes an infinite loop at run time. Defining both inequivalently doesn't cause an error either, it is just inconsistent. Note the axioms specified constrain the semantics of any definition. Given a definition of == either directly or via a definition of eq, then != is defined automatically, although the programmer might replace the default with something more efficient, clearly such an overspecification has to be consistent. Please note, == could also be defined in terms of !=, but we didn't do that. A characterisation of a partial or total order is more complex. It is much more demanding since there is a combinatorial explosion of possible bases. There is an reason to desire overspecification: performance. There also another reason: choice and convenience. So here, there are several questions: one is how to check semantics are obeyed and I am not looking for an answer here (way too hard!). The other question is: How can we specify, and check, that an instance provides at least a basis? And a much harder question: how can we provide several default definitions which depend on the basis chosen?

  Read the article

• best way to "introduce" OOP/OOD to team of experienced C++ engineers

  - by DXM

  I am looking for an efficient way, that also doesn't come off as an insult, to introduce OOP concepts to existing team members? My teammates are not new to OO languages. We've been doing C++/C# for a long time so technology itself is familiar. However, I look around and without major infusion of effort (mostly in the form of code reviews), it seems what we are producing is C code that happens to be inside classes. There's almost no use of single responsibility principle, abstractions or attempts to minimize coupling, just to name a few. I've seen classes that don't have a constructor but get memset to 0 every time they are instantiated. But every time I bring up OOP, everyone always nods and makes it seem like they know exactly what I'm talking about. Knowing the concepts is good, but we (some more than others) seem to have very hard time applying them when it comes to delivering actual work. Code reviews have been very helpful but the problem with code reviews is that they only occur after the fact so to some it seems we end up rewriting (it's mostly refactoring, but still takes lots of time) code that was just written. Also code reviews only give feedback to an individual engineer, not the entire team. I am toying with the idea of doing a presentation (or a series) and try to bring up OOP again along with some examples of existing code that could've been written better and could be refactored. I could use some really old projects that no one owns anymore so at least that part shouldn't be a sensitive issue. However, will this work? As I said most people have done C++ for a long time so my guess is that a) they'll sit there thinking why I'm telling them stuff they already know or b) they might actually take it as an insult because I'm telling them they don't know how to do the job they've been doing for years if not decades. Is there another approach which would reach broader audience than a code review would, but at the same time wouldn't feel like a punishment lecture? I'm not a fresh kid out of college who has utopian ideals of perfectly designed code and I don't expect that from anyone. The reason I'm writing this is because I just did a review of a person who actually had decent high-level design on paper. However if you picture classes: A - B - C - D, in the code B, C and D all implement almost the same public interface and B/C have one liner functions so that top-most class A is doing absolutely all the work (down to memory management, string parsing, setup negotiations...) primarily in 4 mongo methods and, for all intents and purposes, calls almost directly into D. Update: I'm a tech lead(6 months in this role) and do have full support of the group manager. We are working on a very mature product and maintenance costs are definitely letting themselves be known.

  Read the article

• "static" as a semantic clue about statelessness?

  - by leoger

  this might be a little philosophical but I hope someone can help me find a good way to think about this. I've recently undertaken a refactoring of a medium sized project in Java to go back and add unit tests. When I realized what a pain it was to mock singletons and statics, I finally "got" what I've been reading about them all this time. (I'm one of those people that needs to learn from experience. Oh well.) So, now that I'm using Spring to create the objects and wire them around, I'm getting rid of static keywords left and right. (If I could potentially want to mock it, it's not really static in the same sense that Math.abs() is, right?) The thing is, I had gotten into the habit of using static to denote that a method didn't rely on any object state. For example: //Before import com.thirdparty.ThirdPartyLibrary.Thingy; public class ThirdPartyLibraryWrapper { public static Thingy newThingy(InputType input) { new Thingy.Builder().withInput(input).alwaysFrobnicate().build(); } } //called as... ThirdPartyLibraryWrapper.newThingy(input); //After public class ThirdPartyFactory { public Thingy newThingy(InputType input) { new Thingy.Builder().withInput(input).alwaysFrobnicate().build(); } } //called as... thirdPartyFactoryInstance.newThingy(input); So, here's where it gets touchy-feely. I liked the old way because the capital letter told me that, just like Math.sin(x), ThirdPartyLibraryWrapper.newThingy(x) did the same thing the same way every time. There's no object state to change how the object does what I'm asking it to do. Here are some possible answers I'm considering. Nobody else feels this way so there's something wrong with me. Maybe I just haven't really internalized the OO way of doing things! Maybe I'm writing in Java but thinking in FORTRAN or somesuch. (Which would be impressive since I've never written FORTRAN.) Maybe I'm using staticness as a sort of proxy for immutability for the purposes of reasoning about code. That being said, what clues should I have in my code for someone coming along to maintain it to know what's stateful and what's not? Perhaps this should just come for free if I choose good object metaphors? e.g. thingyWrapper doesn't sound like it has state indepdent of the wrapped Thingy which may itself be mutable. Similarly, a thingyFactory sounds like it should be immutable but could have different strategies that are chosen among at creation. I hope I've been clear and thanks in advance for your advice!

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27  | Next Page >