On 4/1/06, Alexandru Popescu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Chris, unfortunately I have to disagree with you. Even if sometimes > constructing an object is a > little more difficult, IMO it is much more important to have clear > separation of concerns. And this > constructor is breaking it: a PersistenceManager should not have to deal > or know how to parse some > files. This is the responsibility of something else. >
I'm ok to drop this constructor but I think the Persistence Manager respects the SOC design pattern. it is doing one thing and delegates some tasks to other objects. But yes, in point of view dependency management, it is maybe not a good idea to build default implementation for those dependencies in the main object. IMO, it is not a so bad design because it gives always the possibility to provide other dependency implementations. FYI, there is already another constructor which provides a default implementation for some dependencies -- Best regards, Christophe
