Today will be a "new" approach to the Object Oriented.
If anyone, it seems that nothing new can not be in this very nature 'theme added I encourage you to read the presentations in the text. You'll also be why the new written in quotation marks.
some time from many sides there are the incentive to become interested in new languages \u200b\u200blike Scala, Groovy, Ruby, ...
So far, all the proponents of this cool show how one can manipulate the collections (sort, search) on a single line of code with the possibility of "gluing" of new methods to existing classes. With all due respect, but it is nothing but a symptom of technical onanism . If I am interested in new language just to avoid hammering loops, however, apply "Speed \u200b\u200bBuggy" utils . Are you sure the new languages \u200b\u200bare created just to the dokleić to the String class 100 new metodek whose existence is known only doklejający?
Still others rediscover the ability to dynamically add "on the fly" to the entity and the methods of recording wczytujących them. I thought the infamous Active Record has long since gone into oblivion. But not - it turns out that he is sexy in some frameworks.
During a recent session of the researches I came across an interesting concept, which gives a true and pragmatic sense of it all konstruktom językowym.Pojawił to behold the "new" paradigm of programming: Date Interaction Context, which indicates the application of dynamic constructs to better (or at least different) modeling problems. So we have something more than sort the list, we have a new quality of thinking about the modeled structure. Developers
DCI argue that mainstream approaches to OO is only a few% of true OO. The classic approach focuses on classes, or on certain structures. They put the classical approach, the allegations that it focuses on class rather than on the premises, which allegedly causes a "spreading with" Use Case Logic after many classes, so in nontrivial applications has become increasingly harder to come up in the capture of logic.
So time to return to the procedural paradigm, where we have all the "flow" in one place?
Not necessarily. Let
has the figure below:
source: http://www.underbjerg.com/2009/11/16/oredev-2009-impressions-and-dci-architecture/
Data describe using Klas some immutable structure - it can be said core model (it may have some basic, general behavior).
Interaction are elevation to maintain the level of the main entities, thus better suited to the mental model user. There are certain roles that may be adopted by objects. Interaction operate on the data because they are mixing them in. ..
Context - Use context odpwiada Caseom or their strides. It is in a certain context data is combined with the roles (behavior) to create objects only .
intuitive example: I am a man, described to me a set of standard parameters. But depending on the context assume some of the roles (and with them the behavior): Programmer, Manager, father, driver, player, client, ...
If I could interest you a little bit the concept of DCI (not to be confused with a bit less innovative CDI:) I recommend the following materials:
- architecture and an interesting example in Ruby - to add intrigue that you will find here an acute TDD criticism.
- interesting approach to modeling - here we have such amazing clarity of thought and show tragikomicznego Qi4j framework (Java is not suited to the DCI)
- Not very inspiring theoretical introduction - from which we learn that these concepts are already tens of years, only somewhere zapodziały in the industry.
- necessarily aware of the DCI in the Scala - plus a collection of stupid examples of sorting;)
Overall I would recommend the materials from the conference Øredev - as you can see the subject matter is very interesting and far beyond the mainstream.
And in an incubator (for now) Eclipse we have something very similar: Object Teams
//==========================
interesting DCI summed up one of my fellow architects (along with "sniper", which can hit a man with a grenade launcher from a distance across the board in Modern Warfare 1): "but you must have eggs to challenge the standards and provide something so different."
