Every single consequence in the pattern was positive.  In other words, you
only say good things about the pattern, nothing bad.  if this were true,
you'd use it in every program.  Don't use any other interface except
JtInterface!  Use it everywhere!

This is a common problem with patterns.  The pattern writer is so enamored
with his pattern that he only wants to say good things about it.  But design
is about tradeoffs.  There is a cloud with every silver lining.    If you
don't understand the costs of a pattern then you don't understand the whole
pattern.  And if you don't describe the costs then you sound like a used-car
salesman.

I've heard this called many things.  I don't like any of those names because
they can be interpreted in many ways.  i don't like Messaging, either.
Perhaps it is about parallel programming, and the pattern is to avoid shared
memory and communicate only by sending messages.  Perhaps it is about
distributed systems, and explores the difference between synchronous and
asynchronous communication.  No, this pattern is about software
architecture, and is about how to keep loose coupling between modules.  Pick
a name that can't be misinterpreted.

-Ralph Johnson
_______________________________________________
patterns-discussion mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/patterns-discussion

Reply via email to