From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: fac41,9a0ff0bffdf63657 X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,9a0ff0bffdf63657 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public X-Google-Thread: f43e6,9a0ff0bffdf63657 X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,4b06f8f15f01a568 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: Patrick Logan Subject: Re: Which wastes more time? (Was Re: Software landmines (loops)) Date: 1998/09/09 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 389557890 References: <6sff74$q0s@gurney.reilly.home> <6sh2j5$jnl$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <35EC2E5A.16DB6CB1@bigfoot-.com> <6sjc0a$1lk$3@news.indigo.ie> <35EFB09E.15412933@s054.aone.net.au> <35f2bd98.40599408@news.erols.com> <35F06A58.F968BDE1@s054.aone.net.au> <35f48276.90997557@news.erols.com> <35F0C3C9.D1E56FF3@s054.aone.net.au> <6t6o05$k8u$1@the-fly.zip.com.au> Organization: Teleport - Portland's Public Access (503) 220-1016 NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 09 Sep 1998 16:28:54 PDT Newsgroups: comp.lang.eiffel,comp.object,comp.software-eng,comp.lang.ada Date: 1998-09-09T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In comp.object Paolo F. Cantoni wrote: : Patrick Logan wrote in message ... : >In comp.object Loryn Jenkins wrote: : > : >: if I recall correctly, Bertrand has class CAR_OWNER inherit from class : >: PERSON. (He offers this as an example of 'how to do inheritance well'.) : > : >: I can't believe it is acceptable because it does not model our : >: concept of reality. : > : >The way I explain my objection to this inheritance relationship is : >that the design may be too rigid for the requirements. Rather than : >assume I share some concept of reality with the customer, I would ask : >the customer if the system must responsible for tracking people that : >become car owners and people who stop being car owners. Even if the : >customer says no, I would still lean toward supporting that : >possibility in teh future. : Then why did you ask the client? You seem to have intended to ignore their : answer... (NOTE: Not flaming, just asking...) The customer supplies the requirements. The developer supplies the implementation to meet the requirements. If I thought the requirements might change in the future, and I could do something to support those anticipated changes (or at least _not_ do something that would prohibit those anticipated changes) then I am free to do so. It all must fit within the cost/benefit curve. So it is not ignoring the customer. It is adding a developer's experience to what the customer says. -- Patrick Logan (H) mailto:plogan@teleport.com (W) mailto:patrickl@gemstone.com http://www.gemstone.com