RE: My Java Experience... latest code - critique (xmlWrapper)

["Fred Kulack" <kulack@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 03/21/2001 at 01:09:04 PM, "Stone, Brad V (TC)" <bvstone@taylorcorp.com>
wrote:
I understand this, but again, what's the difference?  Now all of my objects
rely on the Namable object as well.  My field has many different
attributes.
My fieldlist has fewer and my fieldTable has the same as fieldList.  So if
I
go the Nameable route, then wouldn't I make an interface for each attribute
of my field?
--- end of excerpt ---
Yeah, that's certainly an option, and WOULD make sense for
some of those fields.
But realistically, you only do that when you're accessing
things that can be used commonly across multiple object
types.

Although not in your example, I view 'xmlWrapper' as
one of those things which is probably common ACROSS different
object types and the formatter probably benefits from getting
it generically for any object type. This means an interface
that provides it.


"The stuff we call "software" is not like anything that human society
  is used to thinking about. Software is something like a machine, and
  something like mathematics, and something like language, and
  something like thought, and art, and information...
  but software is not in fact any of those other things."
Bruce Sterling - The Hacker Crackdown

Fred A. Kulack  -  AS/400e  Java and Java DB2 access, Jdbc, JTA, etc...
IBM in Rochester, MN  (Phone: 507.253.5982   T/L 553-5982)
mailto:kulack@us.ibm.com   Personal: mailto:kulack@bresnanlink.net
AOL Instant Messenger: Home:FKulack  Work:FKulackWrk

+---
| This is the JAVA/400 Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to JAVA400-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to JAVA400-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to JAVA400-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner: joe@zappie.net
+---