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

Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #26261 > unrolled thread

Java EE Architecture

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.java.programmer

Contents

  Java EE Architecture art.marole@gmail.com - 2013-10-09 13:41 -0700
    Re: Java EE Architecture Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-10-09 14:45 -0700
      Re: Java EE Architecture Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-10-09 22:00 -0400
    Re: Java EE Architecture Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-10-09 22:18 -0400
      Re: Java EE Architecture art.marole@gmail.com - 2013-10-10 00:47 -0700
        Re: Java EE Architecture Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-10-16 20:37 -0400
    Re: Java EE Architecture lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-10-10 13:26 +0100
      Re: Java EE Architecture 1connu <1connu999@gmail.com> - 2013-10-16 10:45 +0200
        Re: Java EE Architecture Donkey Hottie <donkey@fredriksson.dy.fi> - 2013-10-16 13:42 +0300
          Re: Java EE Architecture lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-10-16 11:55 +0100
            Re: Java EE Architecture Donkey Hottie <donkey@fredriksson.dy.fi> - 2013-10-16 14:18 +0300
            Re: Java EE Architecture Donkey Hottie <donkey@fredriksson.dy.fi> - 2013-10-16 14:25 +0300
              Re: Java EE Architecture lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-10-16 14:23 +0100
                Re: Java EE Architecture Donkey Hottie <donkey@fredriksson.dy.fi> - 2013-10-16 17:10 +0300
                  Re: Java EE Architecture lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-10-16 16:44 +0100
                    Re: Java EE Architecture "L." <carisio@gmail.com> - 2013-10-16 10:15 -0700
                      Re: Java EE Architecture lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-10-16 19:01 +0100
                        Re: Java EE Architecture "L." <carisio@gmail.com> - 2013-10-16 12:17 -0700
                          Re: Java EE Architecture Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2013-10-16 21:01 +0000
                            Re: Java EE Architecture Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-10-16 20:40 -0400
                    Re: Java EE Architecture Donkey Hottie <donkey@fredriksson.dy.fi> - 2013-10-17 00:00 +0300
                Re: Java EE Architecture Wayne <nospam@all.invalid> - 2013-10-16 23:08 -0400
                  Re: Java EE Architecture Donkey Hottie <donkey@fredriksson.dy.fi> - 2013-10-19 17:05 +0300
                    Re: Java EE Architecture Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-10-19 14:48 -0700
                      Re: Java EE Architecture lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-10-20 09:00 +0100
                        Re: Java EE Architecture "Qu0ll" <Qu0llSixFour@gmail.com> - 2013-10-20 19:40 +1100
                          Re: Java EE Architecture lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-10-20 10:07 +0100
            Re: Java EE Architecture Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom2@eastlink.ca> - 2013-12-16 20:14 -0400
              Re: Java EE Architecture lipska the kat <"lipskathekat at yahoo dot co dot uk"> - 2013-12-17 08:47 +0000
          Re: Java EE Architecture Jeff Higgins <jeff@invalid.invalid> - 2013-10-16 20:19 -0400
            Re: Java EE Architecture Jeff Higgins <jeff@invalid.invalid> - 2013-10-16 21:24 -0400
        Re: Java EE Architecture lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-10-16 11:49 +0100
          Re: Java EE Architecture "Qu0ll" <Qu0llSixFour@gmail.com> - 2013-10-16 22:24 +1100
            Re: Java EE Architecture lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-10-16 13:39 +0100
              Re: Java EE Architecture Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-10-16 20:39 -0400
                Re: Java EE Architecture "Qu0ll" <Qu0llSixFour@gmail.com> - 2013-10-17 13:43 +1100
                Re: Java EE Architecture Jeff Higgins <jeff@invalid.invalid> - 2013-10-16 23:22 -0400
                  Re: Java EE Architecture lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-10-17 08:53 +0100
                Re: Java EE Architecture lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-10-17 08:57 +0100
                  Re: Java EE Architecture "Qu0ll" <Qu0llSixFour@gmail.com> - 2013-10-17 19:31 +1100
                    Re: Java EE Architecture lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-10-17 09:56 +0100
                      Re: Java EE Architecture "Qu0ll" <Qu0llSixFour@gmail.com> - 2013-10-17 20:18 +1100
                        Re: Java EE Architecture lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-10-17 10:56 +0100
                          Re: Java EE Architecture "Qu0ll" <Qu0llSixFour@gmail.com> - 2013-10-17 21:39 +1100
                            Re: Java EE Architecture lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-10-17 12:08 +0100
                    Class Person [was: Java EE Architecture] "Chris Uppal" <chris.uppal@metagnostic.REMOVE-THIS.org> - 2013-10-18 08:19 +0100
                  Re: Java EE Architecture Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-10-17 21:00 -0400
                    Re: Java EE Architecture Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-10-17 21:02 -0400
                      Re: Java EE Architecture lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-10-18 09:06 +0100
                    Re: Java EE Architecture lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-10-18 09:04 +0100
                      Re: Java EE Architecture Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-10-19 22:43 -0400
                        Re: Java EE Architecture lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-10-20 09:05 +0100
                          Re: Java EE Architecture Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-10-20 09:24 -0400
        Re: Java EE Architecture Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-10-16 20:43 -0400

Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]

#26359

On 17/10/13 09:31, Qu0ll wrote:
> "lipska the kat"  wrote in message
> news:r7udnfKuf9XNBcLPnZ2dnUVZ7s-dnZ2d@bt.com...
>
>> Good grief I hope not
>>
>> Citizen, Resident, Fish Pie, *anything* but Person :-)
>
> Let's face it, there are no "people" in the world.  The world is
> inhabited by citizens, residents, fish pies, accounts, users and lots
> and lots of animals.
>
> There is not one "person" on Earth!

Now that's just silly isn't it?

If you think about it your sarcasm masks what I think you already know.

It is indeed the case that the planet is inhabited at least in part by 
'people'

How does the concept described in the following link fit into your naive 
model of citizenship where only People can be citizens

http://www.cbc.ca/books/2013/08/are-animals-rights-the-best-battle-for-equality.html

With every post you reinforce my assertion

Keep it up.


-- 
Lipska the Kat©: Troll hunter, sandbox destroyer
and farscape dreamer of Aeryn Sun
GNU/Linux user #560883 - http://www.linuxcounter.net

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26360

"lipska the kat"  wrote in message 
news:YLmdneJQCvHKO8LPnZ2dnUVZ7rmdnZ2d@bt.com...

>> There is not one "person" on Earth!
>
> Now that's just silly isn't it?

Very silly indeed!  And I am glad you can finally see that!

> If you think about it your sarcasm masks what I think you already know.

Sarcasm?  Moi?

> It is indeed the case that the planet is inhabited at least in part by 
> 'people'

*Now* you see it!

> How does the concept described in the following link fit into your naive 
> model of citizenship where only People can be citizens
>
> http://www.cbc.ca/books/2013/08/are-animals-rights-the-best-battle-for-equality.html

WTF?  When did I say "only People can be citizens"?  And what the hell does 
that link have to do with this thread?  Or Java?

> With every post you reinforce my assertion

What goes on in your deluded mind is none of my concern.

> Keep it up.

I will if you will.

--
And loving it,

-Qu0ll (Rare, not extinct)
_________________________________________________
Qu0llSixFour@gmail.com
[Replace the "SixFour" with numbers to email me] 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26361

On 17/10/13 10:18, Qu0ll wrote:
> "lipska the kat"  wrote in message
> news:YLmdneJQCvHKO8LPnZ2dnUVZ7rmdnZ2d@bt.com...

<snip>

>> Keep it up.
>
> I will if you will.

Yes ... well, you carry on designing your systems with a 'Person' class
and I'll carry on avoiding same like the plague.

If you can't see the reasoning behind my assertion by now then any 
further discussion with you on this topic would be akin to casting 
pearls before swine.

Just to clarify things in your confused mind

There is *never* a case where a Person class is needed.



-- 
Lipska the Kat©: Troll hunter, sandbox destroyer
and farscape dreamer of Aeryn Sun
GNU/Linux user #560883 - http://www.linuxcounter.net

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26362

"lipska the kat"  wrote in message 
news:4N2dnfdOrtv7KcLPnZ2dnUVZ8hmdnZ2d@bt.com...

> Just to clarify things in your confused mind
>
> There is *never* a case where a Person class is needed.

Right, got it.  It's good to see you're not a fanatic.

--
And loving it,

-Qu0ll (Rare, not extinct)
_________________________________________________
Qu0llSixFour@gmail.com
[Replace the "SixFour" with numbers to email me] 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26363

On 17/10/13 11:39, Qu0ll wrote:
> "lipska the kat"  wrote in message
> news:4N2dnfdOrtv7KcLPnZ2dnUVZ8hmdnZ2d@bt.com...
>
>> Just to clarify things in your confused mind
>>
>> There is *never* a case where a Person class is needed.
>
> Right, got it.  It's good to see you're not a fanatic.

Not fanaticism, just experience.

Glad you got it in the end. :-)

-- 
Lipska the Kat©: Troll hunter, sandbox destroyer
and farscape dreamer of Aeryn Sun
GNU/Linux user #560883 - http://www.linuxcounter.net

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26369 — Class Person [was: Java EE Architecture]

Qu0ll wrote:

> Let's face it, there are no "people" in the world.  The world is inhabited
> by citizens, residents, fish pies, accounts, users and lots and lots of
> animals.
>
> There is not one "person" on Earth!

Indeed, there are no "objects" either ;-)

Actually I thnk there's some truth to what Lipka claims.  In /most/ systems, 
either the s/w would be all /about/ people, in which case it's likely that 
"Person" would be at best an almost vacuous base class.  Or the system would 
not be about people particularly at all, in which case (as the the cat claims) 
it is likely that you'd want to represent your contacts with people with 
something less tied to the idea of a "person" like "account", "contact", or 
"customer" (all of which might be organisations rather than people, and also 
one "real" person might have more than one account, etc).

So I think that as a rule-of-thunb (not an absolute rule), "No class called 
Person" isn't so bad.  Class Person is a code smell -- not wrong in itself, but 
a useful hint that something /might/ be wrong.

    -- chris 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26367

On 10/17/2013 3:57 AM, lipska the kat wrote:
> On 17/10/13 01:39, 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
>
> <snip>
>
>> 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.
>
> I'd bet the farm that I could come up with a better name for *any*
> concept, in any model.

Apparently not. See below.

>> 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.
>
> Good grief I hope not
>
> Citizen,

It contain some non-citizens.

>          Resident,

It contain some non-residents.

>                    Fish Pie

It does not contain any fish pies.

Arne

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26368

On 10/17/2013 9:00 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> On 10/17/2013 3:57 AM, lipska the kat wrote:
>> On 17/10/13 01:39, 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
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>> 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.
>>
>> I'd bet the farm that I could come up with a better name for *any*
>> concept, in any model.
>
> Apparently not. See below.
>
>>> 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.
>>
>> Good grief I hope not
>>
>> Citizen,
>
> It contain some non-citizens.
>
>>          Resident,
>
> It contain some non-residents.
>
>>                    Fish Pie
>
> It does not contain any fish pies.

You could also consider why it is called Central Person Register and
not Central SomethingElse Register.

Names are important.

At least if people use the information provided by them.

Arne

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26371

On 18/10/13 02:02, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> On 10/17/2013 9:00 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>> On 10/17/2013 3:57 AM, lipska the kat wrote:
>>> On 17/10/13 01:39, 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
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>> 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.
>>>
>>> I'd bet the farm that I could come up with a better name for *any*
>>> concept, in any model.
>>
>> Apparently not. See below.
>>
>>>> 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.
>>>
>>> Good grief I hope not
>>>
>>> Citizen,
>>
>> It contain some non-citizens.
>>
>>>          Resident,
>>
>> It contain some non-residents.
>>
>>>                    Fish Pie
>>
>> It does not contain any fish pies.
>
> You could also consider why it is called Central Person Register and
> not Central SomethingElse Register.
>
> Names are important.

Well quite.

> At least if people use the information provided by them.
>
> Arne
>
>


-- 
Lipska the Kat©: Troll hunter, sandbox destroyer
and farscape dreamer of Aeryn Sun
GNU/Linux user #560883 - http://www.linuxcounter.net

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26370

On 18/10/13 02:00, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> On 10/17/2013 3:57 AM, lipska the kat wrote:
>> On 17/10/13 01:39, 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
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>> 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.
>>
>> I'd bet the farm that I could come up with a better name for *any*
>> concept, in any model.
>
> Apparently not. See below.
>
>>> 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.
>>
>> Good grief I hope not
>>
>> Citizen,
>
> It contain some non-citizens.

Then there is an error in your original statement

You said

"... called Central Person Register for all Danes (my capitalization)."

Calling someone a *Dane* implies they are a 'Citizen' of Denmark
Of course a Dane may give up his Citizenship ... in which case does he 
belong in the Danish Central Person Register? But he's a Dane by birth 
you cry ... does he still belong in the register? I don't know, ask the 
client (the Danish government presumably). If he does it implies a new 
Class (LapsedCitizen perhaps). or maybe just an attribute of Citizen ... 
Boolean lapsed;

>
>>          Resident,
>
> It contain some non-residents.

If someone is not a Dane and is not a Resident and is not a 
LapsedCitizen then why is he in the register?

>
>>                    Fish Pie
>
> It does not contain any fish pies.

Shame, I like fish pie.

There really is no need for a Person class Arne

If you want a base class then how about ... oh I don't know,

Dane   ... but what of non Danes?

How about RegisterEntry ... it describes perfectly what the thing is,
it is status agnostic and can cover any bizarre Danish concept of 
'Danishness'

RegisterEntry <- Citizen <- LapsedCitizen

RegisterEntry <- Resident

RegisterEntry <- FoodItem <- FishPie

etc

Or maybe an entry has a Role

There are a million better words than Person

Of course I have nothing against People, I married one and have a young 
one of my own. I just think that the class 'Person' doesn't say anything 
*specific* enough about a concept from the problem space.



-- 
Lipska the Kat©: Troll hunter, sandbox destroyer
and farscape dreamer of Aeryn Sun
GNU/Linux user #560883 - http://www.linuxcounter.net

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26386

On 10/18/2013 4:04 AM, lipska the kat wrote:
> On 18/10/13 02:00, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>> On 10/17/2013 3:57 AM, lipska the kat wrote:
>>> On 17/10/13 01:39, 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
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>> 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.
>>>
>>> I'd bet the farm that I could come up with a better name for *any*
>>> concept, in any model.
>>
>> Apparently not. See below.
>>
>>>> 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.
>>>
>>> Good grief I hope not
>>>
>>> Citizen,
>>
>> It contain some non-citizens.
>
> Then there is an error in your original statement
>
> You said
>
> "... called Central Person Register for all Danes (my capitalization)."
>
> Calling someone a *Dane* implies they are a 'Citizen' of Denmark

The term Dane is not that well defined.

But the description "all Danes" was not correct.

>>>          Resident,
>>
>> It contain some non-residents.
>
> If someone is not a Dane and is not a Resident and is not a
> LapsedCitizen then why is he in the register?

Who said there were such persons?

>>>                    Fish Pie
>>
>> It does not contain any fish pies.
>
> Shame, I like fish pie.
>
> There really is no need for a Person class Arne
>
> If you want a base class then how about ... oh I don't know,
>
> Dane   ... but what of non Danes?
>
> How about RegisterEntry ... it describes perfectly what the thing is,
> it is status agnostic and can cover any bizarre Danish concept of
> 'Danishness'
>
> RegisterEntry <- Citizen <- LapsedCitizen
>
> RegisterEntry <- Resident
>
> RegisterEntry <- FoodItem <- FishPie

RegisterEntry could certainly be used.

But since it is significantly worse than Person, then there
is not much point.

>  I just think that the class 'Person' doesn't say anything
> *specific* enough about a concept from the problem space.

Well - if Person is the most specific level of abstraction that
covers the content then it is fine.

If RegisterEntry is the most specific level of abstraction that
covers the content then it is also fine.

But since Person is more specific than RegisterEntry and
everybody in the register is a Person, then Person is better
than RegisterEntry.

Arne

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26390

On 20/10/13 03:43, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> On 10/18/2013 4:04 AM, lipska the kat wrote:
>> On 18/10/13 02:00, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>> On 10/17/2013 3:57 AM, lipska the kat wrote:
>>>> On 17/10/13 01:39, 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

<snip>

>>>>> 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.
>>>>
>>>> Good grief I hope not
>>>>
>>>> Citizen,
>>>
>>> It contain some non-citizens.
>>
>> Then there is an error in your original statement
>>
>> You said
>>
>> "... called Central Person Register for all Danes (my capitalization)."
>>
>> Calling someone a *Dane* implies they are a 'Citizen' of Denmark
>
> The term Dane is not that well defined.

You used it.

> But the description "all Danes" was not correct.

You used it

>>>>          Resident,
>>>
>>> It contain some non-residents.
>>
>> If someone is not a Dane and is not a Resident and is not a
>> LapsedCitizen then why is he in the register?
>
> Who said there were such persons?

You did

"It contain some non-citizens."
"It contain some non-residents."

<snip>

>> RegisterEntry <- Citizen <- LapsedCitizen
>>
>> RegisterEntry <- Resident
>>
>> RegisterEntry <- FoodItem <- FishPie
>
> RegisterEntry could certainly be used.
>
> But since it is significantly worse than Person, then there
> is not much point.

In your opinion

>>  I just think that the class 'Person' doesn't say anything
>> *specific* enough about a concept from the problem space.
>
> Well - if Person is the most specific level of abstraction that
> covers the content then it is fine.
>
> If RegisterEntry is the most specific level of abstraction that
> covers the content then it is also fine.
>
> But since Person is more specific than RegisterEntry and
> everybody in the register is a Person, then Person is better
> than RegisterEntry.

If you say so


-- 
Lipska the Kat©: Troll hunter, sandbox destroyer
and farscape dreamer of Aeryn Sun
GNU/Linux user #560883 - http://www.linuxcounter.net

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26394

On 10/20/2013 4:05 AM, lipska the kat wrote:
> On 20/10/13 03:43, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>> On 10/18/2013 4:04 AM, lipska the kat wrote:
>>> If someone is not a Dane and is not a Resident and is not a
>>> LapsedCitizen then why is he in the register?
>>
>> Who said there were such persons?
>
> You did
>
> "It contain some non-citizens."
> "It contain some non-residents."
>
> <snip>

????

Those two statements do not imply what you stated.

>>> RegisterEntry <- Citizen <- LapsedCitizen
>>>
>>> RegisterEntry <- Resident
>>>
>>> RegisterEntry <- FoodItem <- FishPie
>>
>> RegisterEntry could certainly be used.
>>
>> But since it is significantly worse than Person, then there
>> is not much point.
>
> In your opinion

That RegisterEntry is a more general term than Person is
not really an opinion more like something obvious.

Arne

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26351

On 10/16/2013 4:45 AM, 1connu wrote:
> lipska the kat a écrit :
>> A Person class ... A PERSON class., please, please, *please* don't
>> have a Person class
>>
>> For the sake of whatever omnipotent deity you pray to, do not have a
>> Person class
>>
>> *People* do not belong in a computer system.
>>
>> Why?
>>
>> Because it's a poor abstraction.
>>
>> How are you going to model consciousness, sentience, the 'mind', the
>> 'soul'? let alone arms legs, eyes and teeth :-)
>>
>> You *do not need* a Person class.
>>
>> Let's put it another way
>>
>> The very fact that you are having problems deciding where your Person
>> belongs should alert you to the fact that it is a poor abstraction.
>>
>> Try Account, or Record, or if you absolutely *must* User but not
>> Person, you will end up regretting it.

> Why not ?
> You can have an abstract class Person with minimum field (name, date
> birth) and sub class depending of role of theses persons (ex User
> (login/password) ) in your model.

I don't see a problem with a Person class if that is what the
domain really needs.

But be very careful about sub classing a Person class depending on
role.

If a person changes role or if under some circumstances a person can
have multiple roles, then it can become tricky to handle.

Arne

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.java.programmer

csiph-web