[Chicago-talk] super complex object

JT Smith jt at plainblack.com
Mon Aug 1 15:55:09 PDT 2005

See I've tried to move it to an MVC pattern, but I lose several points of efficiency as 
well as making it slightly more complicated for developers to put together subclasses of 
this class.

Under normal circumstances I'm of the mind to create very simple objects with only a 
couple properties and only a couple methods, but in this case I'm more concerned with 
performance and ease of development than I am of good coding practices. That's why I was 
looking for the mixin approach that Jim shoved out.

Thanks for the response though.

On Mon, 1 Aug 2005 16:25:18 -0500
  Edward Summers <ehs at pobox.com> wrote:
> On Aug 1, 2005, at 4:08 PM, JT Smith wrote:
>> Any suggestions? It seems that I can't be the only one to have run  
>> into an
>> overcomplicated object. Help a brother out. =)
> It sounds like you've got a God Object on your hands [1]. My advice  
> would be to try to take a new look at your problem domain with  
> something like CRC cards [2] and try to get a better sense of the  
> classes and their interactions.
> //Ed
> [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_object
> [2] http://c2.com/doc/oopsla89/paper.html
> _______________________________________________
> Chicago-talk mailing list
> Chicago-talk at pm.org
> http://mail.pm.org/mailman/listinfo/chicago-talk

JT ~ Plain Black
ph: 703-286-2525 ext. 810
fax: 312-264-5382

I reject your reality, and substitute my own. ~ Adam Savage

More information about the Chicago-talk mailing list