Yes, I mean, I didn't want to say that every wrapper class is an
Adaptor. Just that in my experience, if you want to find examples of
adaptors, looking through wrapper classes might yield you some examples.
And indeed, up until a certain point adaptors and decorators might
look similar. Adaptors typically (but not necessarily!) translate
interfaces (e.g. they implement methods that a client class expects).
Or it might happen that they adapt semantics (in which case they will
implement methods with the same signature but adapt the behaviour to
be consistent with what a client expects). Decorators typically
override methods. Therefore the client cannot make the difference
between a non-decorated and a decorated object, and just sends a
polymorphic method.
Note that these are just very brief summaries of the much more
extensive discussions found in the design pattern book...
On 22 Jun 2006, at 14:40, Mathieu SUEN wrote:
2006/6/22, Roel Wuyts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
I can sing and dance :-)
Given more time
Of course! No problem.
For the Adaptor thing, any wrapper class will do. There have to exist
such classes in Squeak. Doing a search for classes that ends in
Wrapper will probably yield some examples.
Ok I will searche for it. .. But the Decorator pattern use also this
convention. Don't he?
_______________________________________________
Beginners mailing list
Beginners@lists.squeakfoundation.org
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/beginners
_______________________________________________
Beginners mailing list
Beginners@lists.squeakfoundation.org
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/beginners
