Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #3822

Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern

From Daniele Futtorovic <da.futt.news@laposte-dot-net.invalid>
Newsgroups comp.lang.java.programmer
Subject Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern
Date 2011-05-08 19:48 +0200
Organization A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID <iq6l21$vuh$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References (7 earlier) <c3lbs6pc00he19u3ru6asfpdicu552pvu0@4ax.com> <iq4rj8$j2j$1@dont-email.me> <JLnxp.68858$yp3.49687@newsfe09.iad> <iq68h6$7og$1@dont-email.me> <whAxp.19939$Ot6.2301@newsfe15.iad>

Show all headers | View raw


On 08/05/2011 19:20, Arved Sandstrom allegedly wrote:
> On 11-05-08 11:15 AM, Daniele Futtorovic wrote:
>>>> Anyway, I've had enough of this.
>>>>
>>> Probably just as well. You can't convince everyone to do something
>>> ill-advised.
>>
>> Them's fighting words.
>
> No, merely argumentative words. Like I said, Daniele, I respect your
> opinion - you produce good posts and I read them carefully - but I am
> not impressed by dismissive statements like "Anyway, I've had enough of
> this". That translates to "whatever, I can't make these idiots see the
> light, I'm washing my hands of them" in vernacular English. If you
> happened to say that in a professional environment, say a developers'
> meeting, you'd have a lot of pissed-off people.
>
> It's actually a lot better to say something like "I believe I'm correct,
> but I'm clearly not making my case; I'll leave the discussion at this
> point". Lot more diplomatic.

I have spent quite some time arguing on this topic. I have repeatedly 
made one point that I believe to be central, which you at some point 
even acknowledged, but which nobody cared to take into account. Yes, 
that vernacular is exactly how I meant it.


>> Show me a code example with a method, that is not a factory method; that
>> returns a LinkedHashMap instance; for which it matters to the caller
>> that the return type be declared as LinkedHashMap, rather than Map.
>>
> I don't know why you're excluding factory methods. In fact a factory
> method would be amongst the most likely to declare the return as Map and
> not as LinkedHashMap, so I wouldn't be likely to use one as an example
> anyway.

"Factory method" in the sense of a method whose sole purpose is to 
construct the instance.
E.g.
   <U, V> LinkedHashMap<U, V> createNewMap(){
     // Decide on initial cap. and load factor here
     return new LinkedHashMap<U, V>( 42, 0.42 );
   }


> I don't think I need to invent a new example: the OP has already
> provided one.

I'm asking you to. The following is the only thing resembling code the 
OP provided:
> LinkedHashMap<String, Integer> sortedMap = this.getSortedMap();
>
> public LinkedHashMap<String, Integer> getSortedMap() {
>   //do stuff
> }

This hardly qualifies.


> Let's say he's got client class A (maybe a JSF backing
> bean) that absolutely requires that the DataModel be loaded by a map
> obeying this contract. I'll go further and say that if your requirements
> are so tenuous and erratic that this specific requirement is going to
> change a fair bit, that you've got bigger problems than how you declare
> your collections types. From the sounds of what the OP said this is a
> definite, solid, stable and essential requirement.
>
> Provider class B with the method in question is tasked to supply the map
> that obeys this "predictable iteration order" contract...namely a
> LinkedHashMap.
>
> You can absolutely declare that return value from the B.getMap() method
> as a Map. You'll need to comprehensively Javadoc that method as a
> result, even if it's not a public/published API method, because now Map
> tells you very little. You'll also do well to comment the location of
> the call so as to increase the likelihood that future maintenance in
> class A doesn't ignore the special required nature of _that_ Map.

"Now Map tells you very little". This is the central point. As I have 
argued all along, it tells you /no less/ than it being LinkedHashMap, 
because, as you have acknowledged, the mere fact that the return type is 
LinkedHashMap does not give you any conclusive insight into its 
iteration order (predictability thereof).

In other words, there's no contractual element to this, therefore it 
does not add to the contract. So you would have to document 
comprehensively anyway.

Consequently, applying the more general rule that types ought to be as 
broad as possible and as narrow as necessary, make the return type 
java.util.Map and document comprehensively.

-.-

This is perhaps the sixth time I've written the same thing with a 
different wording. If it still doesn't get through to anyone, then yes, 
I'll declare pearls before swine. Sorry for not being 'diplomatic' more 
than the first half a dozen tries.

-- 
DF.
An escaped convict once said to me:
"Alcatraz is the place to be"

Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar


Thread

"Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Zapanaz <http://joecosby.com/code/mail.pl@foo.com> - 2011-05-05 12:21 -0700
  Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-05-05 15:43 -0400
    Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-05-05 17:19 -0400
  Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Daniele Futtorovic <da.futt.news@laposte-dot-net.invalid> - 2011-05-05 21:47 +0200
  Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Jim Janney <jjanney@shell.xmission.com> - 2011-05-05 14:14 -0600
    Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Zapanaz <http://joecosby.com/code/mail.pl@foo.com> - 2011-05-05 13:26 -0700
    Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Daniele Futtorovic <da.futt.news@laposte-dot-net.invalid> - 2011-05-05 22:27 +0200
      Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Jim Janney <jjanney@shell.xmission.com> - 2011-05-05 14:42 -0600
        Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Daniele Futtorovic <da.futt.news@laposte-dot-net.invalid> - 2011-05-05 22:48 +0200
          Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Jim Janney <jjanney@shell.xmission.com> - 2011-05-05 15:02 -0600
            Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Daniele Futtorovic <da.futt.news@laposte-dot-net.invalid> - 2011-05-06 00:02 +0200
              Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-05-05 19:49 -0300
                Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Daniele Futtorovic <da.futt.news@laposte-dot-net.invalid> - 2011-05-06 02:28 +0200
                Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-05-06 07:24 -0300
                Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-05-06 07:03 -0700
                Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-05-06 17:30 -0300
                Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Daniele Futtorovic <da.futt.news@laposte-dot-net.invalid> - 2011-05-06 18:56 +0200
                Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-05-06 17:50 -0300
                Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Daniele Futtorovic <da.futt.news@laposte-dot-net.invalid> - 2011-05-06 23:37 +0200
                Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-05-06 19:43 -0300
              Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Jim Janney <jjanney@shell.xmission.com> - 2011-05-05 17:17 -0600
                Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Daniele Futtorovic <da.futt.news@laposte-dot-net.invalid> - 2011-05-06 02:28 +0200
          Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Zapanaz <http://joecosby.com/code/mail.pl@foo.com> - 2011-05-05 23:25 -0700
            Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Daniele Futtorovic <da.futt.news@laposte-dot-net.invalid> - 2011-05-06 18:25 +0200
              Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Zapanaz <http://joecosby.com/code/mail.pl@foo.com> - 2011-05-07 16:26 -0700
                Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Daniele Futtorovic <da.futt.news@laposte-dot-net.invalid> - 2011-05-08 03:28 +0200
                Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-05-08 00:05 -0300
                Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Daniele Futtorovic <da.futt.news@laposte-dot-net.invalid> - 2011-05-08 16:15 +0200
                Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-05-08 14:20 -0300
                Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Daniele Futtorovic <da.futt.news@laposte-dot-net.invalid> - 2011-05-08 19:48 +0200
                Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern markspace <-@.> - 2011-05-10 07:36 -0700
                Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Jim Janney <jjanney@shell.xmission.com> - 2011-05-10 13:04 -0600
                Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Daniele Futtorovic <da.futt.news@laposte-dot-net.invalid> - 2011-05-10 21:31 +0200
                Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-05-10 20:01 -0300
                Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Daniele Futtorovic <da.futt.news@laposte-dot-net.invalid> - 2011-05-11 19:14 +0200
                Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-05-11 10:41 -0700
                Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Daniele Futtorovic <da.futt.news@laposte-dot-net.invalid> - 2011-05-11 19:55 +0200
                Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-05-11 16:42 -0400
                Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Daniele Futtorovic <da.futt.news@laposte-dot-net.invalid> - 2011-05-11 23:34 +0200
                Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern "John B. Matthews" <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2011-05-12 00:51 -0400
                Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-05-12 00:58 -0400
                Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-05-12 20:08 +0100
                Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-05-15 13:25 -0300
        Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-05-05 17:24 -0400
          Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Jim Janney <jjanney@shell.xmission.com> - 2011-05-05 16:00 -0600
          Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Jukka Lahtinen <jtfjdehf@hotmail.com.invalid> - 2011-05-06 15:01 +0300
            Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-05-06 12:17 -0400
              Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Zapanaz <http://joecosby.com/code/mail.pl@foo.com> - 2011-05-07 16:28 -0700
    Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-05-05 17:21 -0400
      Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Jim Janney <jjanney@shell.xmission.com> - 2011-05-05 15:58 -0600
        Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-05-05 18:18 -0400
      Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-05-05 19:20 -0300
        Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-05-05 18:23 -0400
          Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-05-05 20:17 -0300
  Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-05-05 18:26 -0300
  Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Steven Simpson <ss@domain.invalid> - 2011-05-05 22:57 +0100
    Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-05-05 23:29 +0100
      Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Steven Simpson <ss@domain.invalid> - 2011-05-06 13:30 +0100
        Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-05-06 12:19 -0400
    Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Jim Janney <jjanney@shell.xmission.com> - 2011-05-05 16:41 -0600
      Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-05-05 20:47 -0300
  Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2011-05-05 16:41 -0700
    Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Jim Janney <jjanney@shell.xmission.com> - 2011-05-05 22:47 -0600
    Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Zapanaz <http://joecosby.com/code/mail.pl@foo.com> - 2011-05-05 23:28 -0700
  Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Michal Kleczek <kleku75@gmail.com> - 2011-05-06 17:15 +0200
    Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-05-06 20:53 -0300
      Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-05-06 21:39 -0400
        Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-05-07 00:56 -0300
      Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Michal Kleczek <kleku75@gmail.com> - 2011-05-08 12:24 +0200
        Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-05-08 13:42 -0300
          Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Michal Kleczek <kleku75@gmail.com> - 2011-05-09 11:04 +0200
            Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-05-09 19:33 -0300
              Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Michal Kleczek <kleku75@gmail.com> - 2011-05-10 15:51 +0200
                Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Jim Janney <jjanney@shell.xmission.com> - 2011-05-10 13:15 -0600
                Re: "Program to an interface" - When to break a design pattern Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-05-10 19:40 -0300

csiph-web