On 6/1/05, Pilgrim, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Dakota Jack [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > ==////== > > > > "Strategy (315) Define a family of algorithms encapsulate each > > one, and make them > > interchangeable. Strategy lets the algorithm vary independently > > from clients that use > > it." > > > > This is exactly I always thought it was too.
The point is that whatever you thought it was you code was merely three implementations of an interface having nothing to do with the Strategy Pattern. This is not mere nitpicking or picnicing. If you look at some of the patterns without a careful eye you will miss everything. For example, you can do a UML diagram of a State Pattern and a Strategy Pattern and get the exact same diagram. Indeed, the GoF book does just that. This does not mean at all, however, that those two patterns are the same. They could not be more different. Also, I am of the opinion that commons chain is not a Chain of Responsibility Pattern even if it is interesting and helpful. I will say more about on a rainy day. ///;-) Pace Vobiscum and Capre Diem -- No one ever went blind looking at the bright side of life. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
