Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!weretis.net!feeder1.news.weretis.net!feeder4.news.weretis.net!feeder2.ecngs.de!ecngs!feeder.ecngs.de!Xl.tags.giganews.com!border1.nntp.ams.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local2.nntp.ams.giganews.com!nntp.bt.com!news.bt.com.POSTED!not-for-mail NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2013 02:53:29 -0500 Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2013 08:53:27 +0100 From: lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> Organization: Trollbusters 3 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130308 Thunderbird/17.0.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer Subject: Re: Java EE Architecture References: <69e1528a-aa62-41ce-88e5-1540f437e89e@googlegroups.com> <44SdnR1nzv406sPPnZ2dnUVZ_q2dnZ2d@westnet.com.au> <525f31cc$0$297$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-ID: Lines: 73 X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com X-AuthenticatedUsername: NoAuthUser X-Trace: sv3-ad8GyqOOU3WS9IUc7E62rZpOFUfkjw1txX09txXq/3v3yWddffoyNs3ej6EI7jHdxKPofPDPn/IyD4q!se5iceVrqYQENbX3b1JVaxwuPSG4olEgt+eefHXOsktGzr7MNz1yNVMIMSuHs2fwy6HM8FF2GPWi X-Complaints-To: abuse@btinternet.com X-DMCA-Complaints-To: abuse@btinternet.com X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly X-Postfilter: 1.3.40 X-Original-Bytes: 4111 Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.java.programmer:26356 On 17/10/13 04:22, Jeff Higgins wrote: > On 10/16/2013 08:39 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote: >> On 10/16/2013 8:39 AM, lipska the kat wrote: >>> On 16/10/13 12:24, Qu0ll wrote: >>>> "lipska the kat" wrote in message >>>> news:Qsydne-OrL7R8sPPnZ2dnUVZ7sidnZ2d@bt.com... >>>> >>>>> A Person class ... A PERSON class., please, please, *please* don't >>>>> have a Person class >>>> >>>> Gosh, this has to be the biggest load of bollocks I have seen in a >>>> long, >>>> long time! >>> >>> Really?, I find that hard to believe given the amount of bollocks >>> appearing in this group :-) >>> >>> It is a tricky concept to grasp but in the end most people who are >>> capable of thinking rationally come around to my point of view. >>> >>>> Please tell me Oh Feline One, if your system deals with "people", how >>>> are you going to model them? >>> >>> Sigh ... my systems never *deal with people*, that's the point. You seem >>> to have missed entirely. It is *never* the case that a Person class is >>> required. >>> >>> 'People' and other actors interact with the system. I have never found a >>> need to include a Person class in any system I have ever had anything to >>> do with. >>> >>> It's a fact, it is possible and it pays dividends. Open your mind, think >>> about it ... it really does make sense. >> >> I think that depends on the system in question. >> >> And the fact that you have never had the need for a Person class does >> not imply that no case exist where it is needed. >> >> Example: in Denmark we have something called Central Person Register for >> all danes. I find it very likely that they have a Person class, because >> they deal with persons. >> >> Arne >> >> > "When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean - neither > more, nor less." I couldn't have put it better myself And this is *exactly* my point What *you* choose it to mean may not be what someone else chooses it to mean, this is why we need to step down a level and think about what exactly we *do* mean when we name a concept. Anyone who thinks that the names we give our concepts are not important is ... deluded. What does 'Employee' say to you? Now what does 'Person' say to you? Think about what these words mean to someone who may not be in your head but has to maintain your system. IMHO the names we give things is the most important part of the system documentation -- Lipska the Kat©: Troll hunter, sandbox destroyer and farscape dreamer of Aeryn Sun GNU/Linux user #560883 - http://www.linuxcounter.net