Meanwhile I've read a little bit further in the book. In chapter 7
this topic comes up again and Steve McConell says that there are
really two camps.

The one say that you should pass just the parameters needed for the
calculation because it's more loosely coupled, easier to read and that
passing an object is violating encapsulation (of this parameter
object). The others say that it makes the interface more stable when
the method takes the object as a parameter, because the method could
take into account any other attribute of that object for its
calculation without changing the interface.

Steve McConnel then says that both are two simple: It's more about the
abstraction the method provides.

Further, if you pass an object you can recognize that you should have
passed the parameters instead if you create the object just for the
method call, setting the parameters needed for the calculation, pass
it to the method which just unwrapps the parameters from the object.
If you chose to pass the parameters to the method you can recognize
that you should have passed an object instead if you frequently change
the signature of the method, always adding/removing a parameter that
always belongs to the same type of object.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The 
Java Posse" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to