On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 09:24:09AM -0800, Stephan Richter wrote: > On Monday 19 January 2009, Christian Theune wrote: > > Using the 'reversal of dependency' (not sure whether this is the > > accurate English term) > > I think it is called "dependency injection".
There's the Dependency Inversion Principle (DIP), which says that high-level modules shouldn't depend on low-level modules; instead they both should depend on an abstraction. -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dependency_inversion_principle And then there's the Dependency Injection Pattern, which is, I suppose, an implementation of the DIP, where classes don't instantiate their dependencies directly, and instead expect the client to supply them. -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dependency_injection Then there's also Inversion of Control, which is a principle advocating framework-ish behaviour (you supply callbacks, we call them when we want) over library-ish behaviour (we supply utilities, you call them when you want), and could be called an abstract principle behind both DIP and DI.... --> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inversion_of_control Oh dear, now I'm confused. ;-) Marius Gedminas -- http://pov.lt/ -- Zope 3 consulting and development
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )