On Jan 1, 2014, at 4:28 PM, Stéphane Ducasse <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >> Ok, but let's get concrete. What does better mean in this case? >> >> I think we could all learn from each other's examples. > > Relations/Collaborations with other classes > Invariant internal representations for real (description of implementation) > + examples. > > Stef This made me remember this book pattern: http://www.amazon.com/Design-Patterns-Elements-Reusable-Object-Oriented/dp/0201633612 I mean, the book is about patterns but it has a beautiful editorial pattern itself for a reference book. For every pattern it defines: 1. Intent 2. Motivation 3. Applicability 4. Sample Code 5. Known Uses Let's say that doing that for every class is too much, then what about: 1. intent 2. applicability and or known uses 3. sample code (very optional) sebastian o/
