X-Received: by 10.66.84.136 with SMTP id z8mr4499008pay.2.1356662967836; Thu, 27 Dec 2012 18:49:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.50.191.131 with SMTP id gy3mr10931193igc.1.1356662967737; Thu, 27 Dec 2012 18:49:27 -0800 (PST)
Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!news.glorb.com!kr7no643292pbb.0!news-out.google.com!6ni67770pbd.1!nntp.google.com!kr7no643285pbb.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer
Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2012 18:49:27 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <50dd0758$0$295$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=173.164.137.214; posting-account=CP-lKQoAAAAGtB5diOuGlDQk0jIwmH0T
NNTP-Posting-Host: 173.164.137.214
References: <e32ed4f5-58a8-4b3b-9868-d856db8141a8@googlegroups.com> <kaksjp$8u7$1@dont-email.me> <20fa5c05-6fcc-47ed-9e80-a44975887928@googlegroups.com> <kao263$pll$1@dont-email.me> <50cfcd0b$0$293$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <rgkvc89ffi9l8mnr1la1ev75okigl14nt3@4ax.com> <50cfd4b9$0$295$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <oguvc8hejq2dadnmim92vmpqh2ikccv2te@4ax.com> <50d112a1$0$283$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <8u04d8dua5rrdshc39ut9ar4lc682hb15u@4ax.com> <50d25949$0$286$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <hZOdncZY0YyUbE_NnZ2dnUVZ8iidnZ2d@bt.com> <50dd0758$0$295$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <010b1b3c-ea0a-4fb9-9cd8-2c77b8238fa2@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: proper use of .java files (layout)
From: Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com>
Injection-Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2012 02:49:27 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.java.programmer:20742

Arne Vajh=F8j wrote:
> lipska the kat wrote:
>> I've been reading this thread from day 1 and I have to say the fug is
>> beginning to clear. It appears that what you are proposing is a
>> 'bottom-up' design process. I guess you expect and hope that 'Objects'
>> will automagically appear when the time is right.
>=20
> ????
>=20
> I don't think the fog is clearing.
>=20
> I am mostly for top-down design not bottom-up design.
>=20
> That a game specific comparator belongs in the game and
> not the card class has nothing to do with top-down
> versus bottom-up.

The inclusion of quotes around the terms "bottom-up" and "Objects" by the O=
P=20
raises suspicions that there is some alternative use of the terms in play h=
ere.

--=20
Lew