On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 01:35:45PM +0200, Markus Elfring
<markus.elfr...@web.de> wrote:
> >> Can additional components become helpful as base classes?
> >
> > Sure but what is the advantage over a single monolithic class?
>
> I suggest to reconsider the change granularity.
Certainly if there will be good arguments in favor of it.
> * Will a bit more code reuse become possible (only on concrete demand)?
I don't see in what way. You're gonna to implement a mix-in class
that could only be mixed with SQLObject's main class. What's the real
practical advantage of such a split? How would the split make code reuse
possible?
> * Does such a structure belong to good software design
> and development practices?
Only in theory. Practice is usually much more complex area. People do
SQL denormalization to simplify joins and speed things up. We always
trade memory for speed or vice versa. We also trade code simplicity (or
at lease consistency) with theoretical design patterns.
> Regards,
> Markus
Oleg.
--
Oleg Broytman https://phdru.name/ p...@phdru.name
Programmers don't die, they just GOSUB without RETURN.
_______________________________________________
sqlobject-discuss mailing list
sqlobject-discuss@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sqlobject-discuss
