I'm with you guys. With a right designed API or architecture, there is no
need for such things. Maybe I'm just a little bit branded by the Stuff I saw
in the last years. (5-6 Methods overloading the original... ;)

2011/10/14 Simone Tripodi <[email protected]>

> +1 to Raf & Mau, methods can be overloaded if needed and no needs of
> over-engineered platform
> Simo
>
> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
> http://simonetripodi.livejournal.com/
> http://twitter.com/simonetripodi
> http://www.99soft.org/
>
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 2:38 PM, Maurizio Cucchiara
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> > I agree with Raffaele,
> > I myself have used nice stuff like Credential object, but I did only
> because
> > we needed an heterogenuos security envoronment.
> > So.IMO, we should use as much architecture as needs.
> >
> > Sent from my mobile device, so please excuse typos and brevity.
> >
> > Maurizio Cucchiara
> >
> > Il giorno 14/ott/2011 13.19, "Raffaele P. Guidi" <
> [email protected]>
> > ha scritto:
> > My personal(and professional) point of view is: one thing is designing
> i.e.
> > a Pointer object which holds the data that is handled by our system (our
> > domain model), one thing is designing the Object Model of the parameters
> > that has to be passed to every single function. I feel, and my experience
> > confirms it, that this could easily lead to over-architecturing. OO is an
> > approach, not a tax ;)
> >
> > Ciao,
> >    R
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 10:23 AM, Daniel Manzke <
> > [email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi guys,
> > ...
> >
>



-- 
Viele Grüße/Best Regards

Daniel Manzke

Reply via email to