From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>
Subject: Re: Constructing by classwide type
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2017 21:45:36 +0200
Date: 2017-04-18T21:45:36+02:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <od5qd0$10nc$1@gioia.aioe.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: od5ni6$u99$1@franka.jacob-sparre.dk
On 2017-04-18 20:57, Randy Brukardt wrote:
> "Alejandro R. Mosteo" <alejandro@mosteo.com> wrote in message
> news:od5ins$drj$1@dont-email.me...
> ...
>> I've been under the same circumstances recently and wondered the same. I
>> hope you get some informed answers. Until date, I have noticed no
>> drawbacks and all the advantages you mention.
>
> I don't think there is AN answer. Unless you have to satisfy someone who is
> worshipping a the church of OOP, the best design is the one that works for
> your application, minimizes unnecessary coupling, and makes as many errors
> as possible detectable at compile-time.
Yes, but in some cases one can prove more or less formally that the
design might not work. So it is not always arbitrary.
Regarding the question it seems overloading vs. overriding / factory vs.
constructing functions, not really exactly same use case.
--
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-04-18 19:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-04-03 1:04 Constructing by classwide type sbelmont700
2017-04-18 17:37 ` Alejandro R. Mosteo
2017-04-18 18:57 ` Randy Brukardt
2017-04-18 19:45 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov [this message]
2017-04-19 20:45 ` Randy Brukardt
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox