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

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )

Reply via email to