Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Elliotte Harold wrote: > Bill de hÓra wrote: > >> I don't seem to be getting all the mail in this thread, but to >> whomever said that, please count me out of your consensus. >> > > My apologies. I think the thread accidentally went off list into private > mail for a time. > > Would you like to step up and defend Source as the appropriate level of > abstraction? I thought I had already indicated: - that a heavily overloaded method indicates a missing abstraction [1] - that Source is not ideal, but a better basis for evolution than a class with a heavily overloaded method. So if it's day 1 of iteration 2, then I suggest starting out from Source not polymorphism [2]. cheers Bill [1] strictly speaking, there's a responsibility that ought to be encapsulated within an object, but currently is not.
|
