Thanks, John.
It's probably also a matter of how you name the classes. It needs to be a 
clear name that describes what it 'is'. Hence, the depot name.
Anyway, indeed I have finished the concept of the app.
Sjef

""John Wells"" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schreef in bericht 
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On 6/30/06, Sjef <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Thanks, John,
>> I'm not sure I completely get the idea of a pair class.
>>
>> As an question and answer are in the same database tabel I now created a
>> questionDepot class that gets the array from the db, does save and update
>> operations, and for example, sets a flag in the db tabel when a question 
>> is
>> accepted for the list.
>>
>
> Hi Sjef,
>
> It sounds as if you've got the idea, even if I didn't explain myself
> well.  My point was to *not* create a Question class that maintained
> an array of questions, which was only _implicitly_ related to a
> similarly-structured but disparate Answers class.  An array of
> questions sitting beside an array of answers is, in my opinion, not a
> proper abstraction of the objects you're dealing with.
>
> Perhaps it is out of experience that I'm harping on this point,
> because I've been burned by a similar design before.  One of my first
> OO projects was a weblog, and I had built a Post class, and then for
> posts with galleries, a separate Gallery class that contained *only*
> image information for it's parent Post.
>
> On it's own, this wasn't all bad, but the big mistake I made was how I
> handled multiple posts and multiple galleries (like for building out
> the homepage where I showed 5 recent posts and a thumbnail from each,
> if they were galleries).  Within each Post and Gallery class, I turned
> the properties into _arrays_.  So what originally was a string for the
> post's title, now became an array of strings for many posts.  Likewise
> for the Gallery class.  Arrays of thumbnails became arrays of arrays
> of thumbnails.
>
> I'm sure The List will shudder at this design, but hey, I've learned
> my lesson.  Be-lieve-me.  Anyway, the point is, your initial approach
> was the same (if I read it correctly).  You suggested an array of
> questions, and an array of answers, which would only be implicitly
> related.  Your design started with the concept of many questions, and
> many answers, but my argument is that, abstractly, you should begin
> with one question, and one answer.  Then think in terms of a
> question-answer pair that *belong to each other*.  And then think of
> many question-answer pairs.
>
> Anyway, I'm sure that by the time you've finished reading this
> hair-splitting rambling, you've already finished your app and moved on
> to something else entirely.  :)
>
> -John W 

-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Reply via email to