[lnkForumImage]
TotalShareware - Download Free Software

Confronta i prezzi di migliaia di prodotti.
Asp Forum
 Home | Login | Register | Search 


 

Forums >

comp.lang.ruby

Re: New to OOP and Abstract Session Pattern

james_b

2/22/2006 2:51:00 PM

Tony Mobily wrote:
> Hello people,
>
> As some of you know, I would like to start "thinking" in objects. So, I
> am trying to study some patterns.


Patterns may make little sense if you've no experience with OO. Simply
knowing a pattern isn't enough to help you determine appropriate use.


Consider looking at

Designing Object-Oriented Software, by Rebecca Wirfs-Brock

Agile Software Development, by Robert C. Martin





--
James Britt

"A principle or axiom is of no value without the rules for applying it."
- Len Bullard


3 Answers

Tony Mobily

2/22/2006 4:52:00 PM

0

Hi,

OK thanks James!

(The list of book I have to read is getting dangerously long...!)

Merc.

>> Hello people,
>> As some of you know, I would like to start "thinking" in objects.
>> So, I am trying to study some patterns.
>
>
> Patterns may make little sense if you've no experience with OO.
> Simply knowing a pattern isn't enough to help you determine
> appropriate use.
>
>
> Consider looking at
>
> Designing Object-Oriented Software, by Rebecca Wirfs-Brock
>
> Agile Software Development, by Robert C. Martin
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> James Britt
>
> "A principle or axiom is of no value without the rules for applying
> it."
> - Len Bullard


Daniel Nugent

2/22/2006 8:34:00 PM

0

Well, the thing is that the AbstractSessionPattern in Ruby looks
suspiciously like a Factory pattern. The Server is customizing
instances of Session objects which it is returning.

It's probablly a fair bit different looking for statically typed languages.

OO thinking isn't going to come through reading patterns. Patterns
help you recognize how and where you can apply a solution that's
already been vetted when you're designing/coding.

Thinking in terms of Objects will come very naturally as you gain more
experience.

On the other hand, you might find it a little easier if you thought of
Objects as Actors instead (that might get confusing though since Actor
systems are closely related and a little different than Object
systems). I personally think that by focusing on what an Object can
do and how it behaves in a system and sort of putting what it stores
on the backburner (until you need to think about it).

On 2/22/06, Tony Mobily <merc@mobily.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> OK thanks James!
>
> (The list of book I have to read is getting dangerously long...!)
>
> Merc.
>
> >> Hello people,
> >> As some of you know, I would like to start "thinking" in objects.
> >> So, I am trying to study some patterns.
> >
> >
> > Patterns may make little sense if you've no experience with OO.
> > Simply knowing a pattern isn't enough to help you determine
> > appropriate use.
> >
> >
> > Consider looking at
> >
> > Designing Object-Oriented Software, by Rebecca Wirfs-Brock
> >
> > Agile Software Development, by Robert C. Martin
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > James Britt
> >
> > "A principle or axiom is of no value without the rules for applying
> > it."
> > - Len Bullard
>
>


--
-Dan Nugent


Daniel Nugent

2/22/2006 8:37:00 PM

0

Yeah, I didn't finish my sentence there, d'oh (need a way to edit
mailing list messages).

I personally think that by focusing on what an Object can do and how
it behaves in a system and sort of putting what it stores on the
backburner (until you need to think about it) can help make it easier
to think about programming in an Object Oriented style.

On 2/22/06, Daniel Nugent <nugend@gmail.com> wrote:
> Well, the thing is that the AbstractSessionPattern in Ruby looks
> suspiciously like a Factory pattern. The Server is customizing
> instances of Session objects which it is returning.
>
> It's probablly a fair bit different looking for statically typed languages.
>
> OO thinking isn't going to come through reading patterns. Patterns
> help you recognize how and where you can apply a solution that's
> already been vetted when you're designing/coding.
>
> Thinking in terms of Objects will come very naturally as you gain more
> experience.
>
> On the other hand, you might find it a little easier if you thought of
> Objects as Actors instead (that might get confusing though since Actor
> systems are closely related and a little different than Object
> systems). I personally think that by focusing on what an Object can
> do and how it behaves in a system and sort of putting what it stores
> on the backburner (until you need to think about it).
>
> On 2/22/06, Tony Mobily <merc@mobily.com> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > OK thanks James!
> >
> > (The list of book I have to read is getting dangerously long...!)
> >
> > Merc.
> >
> > >> Hello people,
> > >> As some of you know, I would like to start "thinking" in objects.
> > >> So, I am trying to study some patterns.
> > >
> > >
> > > Patterns may make little sense if you've no experience with OO.
> > > Simply knowing a pattern isn't enough to help you determine
> > > appropriate use.
> > >
> > >
> > > Consider looking at
> > >
> > > Designing Object-Oriented Software, by Rebecca Wirfs-Brock
> > >
> > > Agile Software Development, by Robert C. Martin
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > James Britt
> > >
> > > "A principle or axiom is of no value without the rules for applying
> > > it."
> > > - Len Bullard
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> -Dan Nugent
>


--
-Dan Nugent