Reputation
1,272
Top tag
Next privilege 2,000 Rep.
Edit questions and answers
Badges
1 14 20
Newest
 Yearling
Impact
~39k people reached

  • 0 posts edited
  • 7 helpful flags
  • 140 votes cast
Mar
30
awarded  Yearling
Mar
10
comment Does this pattern have a name?
@RobbieDee, that was an interesting read. I think this question falls under the "what is this thing" and not "how to name this thing". The question here being expanded to "is this a thing? and if so what is this thing's name?".
Mar
10
comment Does this pattern have a name?
It's a list of data extractors, a command does not have a return value, and a strategy is supposed to replace another strategy as a singular thing. This is why it is not a command or a strategy.
Mar
10
asked Does this pattern have a name?
Nov
29
comment Is it ok to use service locator for ubiquitously used dependencies?
@PhilipKendall I think bunching up services to a single repository would be... Inelegant. It's also very much not SRP.
Nov
29
asked Is it ok to use service locator for ubiquitously used dependencies?
Oct
7
comment What are the standards for dealing with pluralia tantum in your code?
I would avoid naming the trousers trouserList since it could misrepresent the type behind it. Being that C# is tagged in the question I think XxxCollection is better since ICollection is an interface and not a specific implementation.
Sep
1
comment Should well-known business ID of an entity be represented with a dedicated type in DDD/OOP?
An old question of mine touched on the subject with different opinions: programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/281827/… I went with creating the types and continue to do so.
May
9
awarded  Great Question
May
5
awarded  Favorite Question
May
5
comment Should we define types for everything?
You are correct, I haven't thought about it like that. But the command pattern isn't a 100% good fit because the logic of the operation is encapsulated in another class and I can't put it inside the object that is the Command. It would be wtf-y to call this class a command and then not have the logic inside it.
May
4
awarded  Notable Question
May
4
awarded  Yearling
May
4
comment How to represent a Rubik's Cube in a data structure
This data model is more true to reality but it makes some of the simple operations that you would like to do harder than they should be - Just getting the state of the cube would require traveling recursively through lists of cubes which is cumbersome.
May
4
awarded  Good Question
May
4
awarded  Popular Question
May
4
comment Should we define types for everything?
@Paul, this is exactly where my question comes from. In Haskell I'd easily create a file with 20 types that encapsulate all the primitive types. But C#/Java/OOP trend of the week all have overhead of creating these things. You could avoid some of it by using structs where appropriate and most of the time you don't really care for performance issues (compilers are dead[1][cr.yp.to/talks/2015.04.16/slides-djb-20150416-a4.pdf]). The performance issue I'm seeing is human in having to create all these types and maintain them, as called on by MainMa.
May
4
awarded  Nice Question
May
3
asked Should we define types for everything?
May
2
awarded  Notable Question