interface-segregation-principle

Interface Segregation Principle and default methods in Java 8

阅读更多关于 Interface Segregation Principle and default methods in Java 8

问题 As per the Interface Segregation Principle clients should not be forced to implement the unwanted methods of an interface ...and so we should define interfaces to have logical separation. But default methods introduced in Java 8 have provided the flexibility to implement methods in Java interfaces. It seems Java 8 has provided the feasibility to enhance an interface to have some methods not related to its core logic, but with some default or empty implementation. Does it not violate the ISP?

Interface Segregation Principle and default methods in Java 8

阅读更多关于 Interface Segregation Principle and default methods in Java 8

In SOLID, what is the distinction between SRP and ISP? (Single Responsibility Principle and Interface Segregation Principle)

阅读更多关于 In SOLID, what is the distinction between SRP and ISP? (Single Responsibility Principle and Interface Segregation Principle)

问题 How does the SOLID "Interface Segregation Principle" differ from "Single Responsibility Principle"? The Wikipedia entry for SOLID says that ISP splits interfaces which are very large into smaller and more specific ones so that clients will only have to know about the methods that are of interest to them However, to me that sounds like just applying the SRP to interfaces as well as classes. After all, if an interface is only responsible for just one conceptual thing, than you wouldn't be able

Is Interface segregation principle only a substitue for Single responsibility principle?

阅读更多关于 Is Interface segregation principle only a substitue for Single responsibility principle?

问题 Is interface segregation principle only a substitue for single responsibility principle ? I think that if my class fulfill SRP there is no need to extract more than one interface. So ISP looks like solution in case we have to break SRP for some reason. Am I right ? 回答1: No. Take the example of a class whose responsibility is persisting data on e.g. the harddrive. Splitting the class into a read- and a write part would not make practical sense. But some clients should only use the class to

Design pattern for default implementation with empty methods

阅读更多关于 Design pattern for default implementation with empty methods

问题 Is there a specific design pattern that describes the scenario where a non-abstract default implementation is provided that implements all or some of the methods on the interface with empty, NO-OP implementations. This being done with the intent of alleviating subclasses with the burden of implementing methods that they themselves may not need/use: public interface MyInterface { public void doThis(); public void doThat(); public void done(); } public class MyClass implements MyInterface {

Design pattern for default implementation with empty methods

阅读更多关于 Design pattern for default implementation with empty methods

Is there a specific design pattern that describes the scenario where a non-abstract default implementation is provided that implements all or some of the methods on the interface with empty, NO-OP implementations. This being done with the intent of alleviating subclasses with the burden of implementing methods that they themselves may not need/use: public interface MyInterface { public void doThis(); public void doThat(); public void done(); } public class MyClass implements MyInterface { public void doThis() { // NO-OP } public void doThat() { // NO-OP } public void done() { // Some standard

Is the Composite Pattern SOLID?

阅读更多关于 Is the Composite Pattern SOLID?

问题 A Leaf in the Composite Pattern implements the Component interface, including Add , Remove , and GetChild methods that a Leaf is never going to use. This seems to be a violation of the Interface Segregation Principle. So is the usage of Composite Pattern SOLID? link to Composite Pattern: http://www.dofactory.com/Patterns/PatternComposite.aspx 回答1: The real smell in the pattern as depicted in your link and most books is that Component has the methods of a Composite . I think this is probably

What is the reasoning behind the Interface Segregation Principle?

阅读更多关于 What is the reasoning behind the Interface Segregation Principle?

The Interface Segregation Principle (ISP) says that many client specific interfaces are better than one general purpose interface. Why is this important? ISP states that: Clients should not be forced to depend on methods that they do not use. ISP relates to important characteristics - cohesion and coupling . Ideally your components must be highly tailored. It improves code robustness and maintainability. Enforcing ISP gives you following bonuses: High cohesion - better understandability, robustness Low coupling - better maintainability, high resistance to changes If you want to learn more

Interface Segregation Principle- Program to an interface

阅读更多关于 Interface Segregation Principle- Program to an interface

I was reading about SOLID and other design principles. I thought ISP was the same as "Program to an interface, not an implementation". But it looks like these are different principles? Is there a difference? Pete Stensønes ISP is focused on the idea of each interface representing one discrete and cohesive behavior. That is, each logical group of things an object should do would map to a single specific interface. A class might want to do several things, but each thing would map to a specific interface representing that behavior. The idea is each interface is very focused. Nazar Merza Robert

What is the reasoning behind the Interface Segregation Principle?

阅读更多关于 What is the reasoning behind the Interface Segregation Principle?

问题 The Interface Segregation Principle (ISP) says that many client specific interfaces are better than one general purpose interface. Why is this important? 回答1: ISP states that: Clients should not be forced to depend on methods that they do not use. ISP relates to important characteristics - cohesion and coupling. Ideally your components must be highly tailored. It improves code robustness and maintainability. Enforcing ISP gives you following bonuses: High cohesion - better understandability,