Re: Polymorphism sucks [Was: Paradigms which way to go?]
- From: "Ilja Preuß" <it@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2005 21:32:34 +0200
Thomas Gagne wrote:
> The intersection above is another rectangle so why return an
> intersection when I can return a rectangle?
Well, depending on the requirements, it might be simpler - for example, if
we need the intersection anyway, and don't care at all about wether an
intersection is a rectangle.
That's why I think that statements like "OO is good/bad for shapes" is
nonsense - you need to know what a system is supposed *to do* to decide
wether and how to use an implementation technique like OO. If the
application needs to decide wether all rectangles are green, we might
actually prefer Prolog... ;)
Cheers, Ilja
.
- References:
- Re: Polymorphism sucks [Was: Paradigms which way to go?]
- From: Ilja Preuß
- Re: Polymorphism sucks [Was: Paradigms which way to go?]
- From: Robert C . Martin
- Re: Polymorphism sucks [Was: Paradigms which way to go?]
- From: Thomas Gagne
- Re: Polymorphism sucks [Was: Paradigms which way to go?]
- Prev by Date: Re: Polymorphism sucks [Was: Paradigms which way to go?]
- Next by Date: Re: Object Circular Dependencies
- Previous by thread: Re: Polymorphism sucks [Was: Paradigms which way to go?]
- Next by thread: Re: Polymorphism sucks [Was: Paradigms which way to go?]
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|