Comments for Chocolate for Dogs http://chocolatefordogs.com This Space for Rent Fri, 12 Mar 2010 03:37:29 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 Comment on Implementing Basic JavaScript Destructor Functionality by JavascriptBank.com http://chocolatefordogs.com/2010/03/06/implementing-basic-javascript-destructor-functionality/comment-page-1/#comment-4842 JavascriptBank.com Fri, 12 Mar 2010 03:37:29 +0000 http://chocolatefordogs.com/?p=825#comment-4842 very cool & good tips, thank you very much for sharing. Can I <a href="http://www.javascriptbank.com/submit/" rel="nofollow">share this post</a> on my JavaScript library? Awaiting your response. Thank very cool & good tips, thank you very much for sharing.

Can I share this post on my JavaScript library?

Awaiting your response. Thank

]]> Comment on Java QuickTip: Use Interfaces to Define Models by mcory http://chocolatefordogs.com/2010/03/08/java-quicktip-use-interfaces-to-define-models/comment-page-1/#comment-4837 mcory Tue, 09 Mar 2010 18:21:49 +0000 http://chocolatefordogs.com/?p=846#comment-4837 You are quite right -- it most definitely is a violation of SRP, and I should've mentioned that in the post. Although, I guess one could argue that, as long as you're working with a "dumb" interface that just contains get/set methods (or properties, if you prefer C# lingo), there isn't much of a violation because the only "behavior" the model encapsulates is data storage. The UI has to store the data on some level anyways -- otherwise you couldn't refer to it -- so it's simply exposing some of it's behavior under a different name. (FWIW, it could also be considered an Interface Segregation Principle violation depending on your perspective as well.) By having the reference and delegating, do you mean that the ContactPanel still implements the interface, or just returns the Contact? If it implements the interface and defers to the Contact, that kinda defeats the purpose of having it implement the interface to begin with (i.e. to get the data directly from/put the data directly into the UI components). It might be appropriate for it to return a Contact instance that it creates and initializes with data from the UI components, or to initialize it's UI components from a Contact instance. However, I don't think that keeping a Contact instance and passing it around would necessarily be a good way of going about it. I could be wrong though ;) You are quite right — it most definitely is a violation of SRP, and I should’ve mentioned that in the post. Although, I guess one could argue that, as long as you’re working with a “dumb” interface that just contains get/set methods (or properties, if you prefer C# lingo), there isn’t much of a violation because the only “behavior” the model encapsulates is data storage. The UI has to store the data on some level anyways — otherwise you couldn’t refer to it — so it’s simply exposing some of it’s behavior under a different name.

(FWIW, it could also be considered an Interface Segregation Principle violation depending on your perspective as well.)

By having the reference and delegating, do you mean that the ContactPanel still implements the interface, or just returns the Contact? If it implements the interface and defers to the Contact, that kinda defeats the purpose of having it implement the interface to begin with (i.e. to get the data directly from/put the data directly into the UI components). It might be appropriate for it to return a Contact instance that it creates and initializes with data from the UI components, or to initialize it’s UI components from a Contact instance. However, I don’t think that keeping a Contact instance and passing it around would necessarily be a good way of going about it. I could be wrong though ;)

]]> Comment on Java QuickTip: Use Interfaces to Define Models by sud http://chocolatefordogs.com/2010/03/08/java-quicktip-use-interfaces-to-define-models/comment-page-1/#comment-4836 sud Tue, 09 Mar 2010 17:49:38 +0000 http://chocolatefordogs.com/?p=846#comment-4836 Isn't this violating the Single Responsibilty Principle. The class is both responsible for UI behavior and Model behavior. Instead how about if ContactPanel has a reference to an instance of Contact and delegates to it as needed? Isn’t this violating the Single Responsibilty Principle. The class is both responsible for UI behavior and Model behavior.

Instead how about if ContactPanel has a reference to an instance of Contact and delegates to it as needed?

]]> Comment on A Resolution by mcory http://chocolatefordogs.com/2009/12/31/a-resolution/comment-page-1/#comment-4781 mcory Sat, 02 Jan 2010 18:19:00 +0000 http://chocolatefordogs.com/?p=784#comment-4781 Hey Zac -- it's great to hear from you! Trust me, you haven't missed much on the blog -- I hadn't posted anything new in over a year. Hope your 2010 is a great one! --Matt Hey Zac — it’s great to hear from you!

Trust me, you haven’t missed much on the blog — I hadn’t posted anything new in over a year.

Hope your 2010 is a great one!

–Matt

]]> Comment on A Resolution by Zac V. http://chocolatefordogs.com/2009/12/31/a-resolution/comment-page-1/#comment-4780 Zac V. Fri, 01 Jan 2010 11:08:08 +0000 http://chocolatefordogs.com/?p=784#comment-4780 Have a much better year than the previous one. ( shouldn't be very difficult ). Haven't read your blog in awhile, Hope all is going well! -Zac Have a much better year than the previous one. ( shouldn’t be very difficult ).

Haven’t read your blog in awhile, Hope all is going well!

-Zac

]]>