Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Jeff Higgins Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer Subject: Re: Java EE Architecture Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2013 23:22:10 -0400 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 47 Message-ID: References: <69e1528a-aa62-41ce-88e5-1540f437e89e@googlegroups.com> <44SdnR1nzv406sPPnZ2dnUVZ_q2dnZ2d@westnet.com.au> <525f31cc$0$297$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2013 03:22:12 +0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: mx05.eternal-september.org; posting-host="6b9e92482af47766954d85fb77d372f5"; logging-data="20836"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19S7giF/iyDqRJ4kfhHQ2H7I4qgzbhhUtk=" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130922 Icedove/17.0.9 In-Reply-To: <525f31cc$0$297$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> Cancel-Lock: sha1:FK93BJ+5tLpUlJe0zJ7zC71xQGI= Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.java.programmer:26355 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."