On Mon, 08 Nov 2004 14:25:34 -0000, jhrothjr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> --- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Luiz Esmiralha
>
>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Mon, 08 Nov 2004 17:37:49 +1300 (NZDT), John Carter
> > The Naked Objects implementation lets you choose which objects are
> > "naked" and doesnt expose the internals of an object to the user, only
> > the non-private interface. Properties are accessed though getters and
> > setters as usual and private methods cannot be called from the outside
> > world.
>
> It's even a bit more restricted than that.
> There is a very specific protocol involving
> naming standards and required method signatures
> that you have to follow before
> either an object or any field or method on that
> object is visible to the outside.
>
> While I hate to use the word impossible, I
> can't think of a way offhand of accidentally
> exposing something to the outside world that
> you didn't want exposed.
You are absolutely right. I recall having to use types provided by the
framework to contain domain objects properties. This creates great
coupling between the framework and your domain model. This has obvious
pros and cons, but I think the positive side is dominant.
>
>
> > The main idea behind this is permiting direct access to the underlying
> > domain model of your application and automatic generation of the GUI.
>
> In the book, they use the notion of "expressive
> objects", or "behaviorally complete objects".
> That is, you expose the domain objects
> that are natural to the way the customer thinks
> about the domain, and you then make those objects
> express ***all*** of the properties (fields and
> actions) that those natural objects can have in
> the user's conceptual model.
This addresses the Anemic Domain Model anti-pattern as defined by Martin Fowler?
>
> > This way, you only have to worry about coding the domain logic and
> > building a very tight domain model.
>
> I'm not so sure I would go that far! However,
> the notion that the top layer of the domain
> model is a direct reflection of the user's
> intuitive domain model is very attractive.
>
Ok, ok, I got carried away. :)
> > I think its a beautiful idea and I used it to prototype a system with
> > great success. I would like to try and plug a custom GUI toolkit into
> > it.
>
> It's not just a wonderful prototyping tool. I've
> sometimes thought that all applications should be
> written that way, with task oriented interfaces
> bolted on top where there is a clear need.
>
I look forward the oportunity to test it in a real distributed
production environment. Maybe some extension is needed to deploy Naked
Objects this way?
> They've got their own test package built in. It's
> somewhat similar to FIT, but uses jUnit as the
> vehicle. One very nice thing is that it produces
> output that can then be dropped right into a
> training manual.
>
Gotta check it out...
To Post a message, send it to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ad-free courtesy of objectmentor.com
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/extremeprogramming/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
