Distributed applications and OOD
From: Fredrik Bertilsson (fredrik_bertilsson_at_passagen.se)
Date: 09/11/04
- Next message: Robert C. Martin: "Re: Is this the DIP confusion?"
- Previous message: Robert C. Martin: "Re: Static vs. Dynamic typing"
- Next in thread: Universe: "Re: Distributed applications and OOD"
- Reply: Universe: "Re: Distributed applications and OOD"
- Reply: H. S. Lahman: "Re: Distributed applications and OOD"
- Reply: Kurt: "Re: Distributed applications and OOD"
- Reply: Robert C. Martin: "Re: Distributed applications and OOD"
- Reply: Mark Nicholls: "Re: Distributed applications and OOD"
- Reply: Cristiano Sadun: "Re: Distributed applications and OOD"
- Reply: John Urberg: "Re: Distributed applications and OOD"
- Reply: paul campbell: "Re: Distributed applications and OOD"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: 10 Sep 2004 21:45:39 -0700
For developing distributed applications, using EJB or Web Services,
following pattern is very common: Data is transfered between the
client and server using value-objects which purpose is to hold data
and doesn't implement any logic at all. On the server-side, client
requests are handled by facade objects that are stateless, which means
that they have no member variables. Behind the facade layer there use
to be a business logic layer or data access layer that are also
stateless. All layers on the server-side use to operate on the
value-objects.
>From my point of view this does not look like a object oriented
design. You have pure data objects and pure functional objects. But
still it is the only working design for distributed applications.
Every attempt to have objects containing both data and logic, will
have drawbacks. For example, if you use this kind of objects on the
server-side, you still have to write data transfer objects, which will
carry almost the same data as the "real" object, and you will have
duplication in your code.
What do you guys think of this?
* This design is a bad design.
* Or, this is still a good OO design.
* Or, OO design is not suitable in distributed applications.
* Or???
/Fredrik
- Next message: Robert C. Martin: "Re: Is this the DIP confusion?"
- Previous message: Robert C. Martin: "Re: Static vs. Dynamic typing"
- Next in thread: Universe: "Re: Distributed applications and OOD"
- Reply: Universe: "Re: Distributed applications and OOD"
- Reply: H. S. Lahman: "Re: Distributed applications and OOD"
- Reply: Kurt: "Re: Distributed applications and OOD"
- Reply: Robert C. Martin: "Re: Distributed applications and OOD"
- Reply: Mark Nicholls: "Re: Distributed applications and OOD"
- Reply: Cristiano Sadun: "Re: Distributed applications and OOD"
- Reply: John Urberg: "Re: Distributed applications and OOD"
- Reply: paul campbell: "Re: Distributed applications and OOD"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|