Re: Interface-based programming
From: Rakesh Rajan (rakesh-no-spam-rajanhere_at_hotmail.com)
Date: 09/25/04
- Next message: Willy Denoyette [MVP]: "Re: Is C# support load device driver?"
- Previous message: Rakesh Rajan: "Re: Two things that bug me about C#"
- In reply to: Patrick Kristiansen: "Interface-based programming"
- Next in thread: Jeff Louie: "Re: Interface-based programming"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sat, 25 Sep 2004 22:34:30 +0530
Hi Patrick,
By creating interfaces and publicizing it to your clients, you are promising
them that your component will have that definition, whatever the
implementation would be. Instead of making an abstract class public, it's
always better to hide the implementation and making ppl know only the
definitions.
HTH,
- Rakesh Rajan
"Patrick Kristiansen" <patrick@sixulon.dk> wrote in message
news:457dae9b.0409250801.16533a2d@posting.google.com...
> Hi group!
>
> I've been reading Juval Löwys "Programming .NET Components", and I
> think it is a very good book, giving nice guidelines on how to really
> exhaust the possibilities of .NET in general.
>
> Juval Löwy is indeed an advocate of using interface-based programming
> (he wrote a chapter dedicated to it, and he's using it througout the
> book).
>
> I have one simple question. When designing your own components, is it
> true - according to the rules of interface-based programming - that
> you should create interfaces for your clients to use, and advertise
> for them to do so? So every time I design a class, it should have a
> corresponding interface?
>
> Regards,
> Patrick
- Next message: Willy Denoyette [MVP]: "Re: Is C# support load device driver?"
- Previous message: Rakesh Rajan: "Re: Two things that bug me about C#"
- In reply to: Patrick Kristiansen: "Interface-based programming"
- Next in thread: Jeff Louie: "Re: Interface-based programming"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
