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: 103376,658cbf6222fa4bf5 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: Simon Wright Subject: Re: OO and large packages Date: 1998/04/23 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 347082310 X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pogner.demon.co.uk:158.152.70.98 References: <353f7983.1926480@SantaClara01.news.InterNex.Net> X-Complaints-To: abuse@demon.net X-Trace: news.demon.co.uk 893364291 nnrp-08:10358 NO-IDENT pogner.demon.co.uk:158.152.70.98 Organization: At Home Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1998-04-23T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: tmoran@bix.com (Tom Moran) writes: > Is there a good methodology to break up a complex object into multiple > smaller packages? > In a windowing system I have a "window" object with a great many > functions for both input and output, some of which are rather complex. You could look at the (by now conventional) approach of Xaw/Motif/Tk/Java, and for all I know MS-Windows, and regard the outer window as a container for window interface components or widgets (which may of course be themselves containers, recursively, but include 'terminals' like buttons, menus, labels, entries ...). Widgets have appropriate subsets of all possible behaviours (eg, buttons can be pressed). The subsets tend to be reasonably small. Come to that, why reinvent the wheel? Check out TASH at http://ocsystems.com/ (http://ocsystems.com/xada/ I think).