I think some people are taking this a bit too seriously.
This particular example cannot be taken seriously as an
approximation of a real bank, and the "credentials"
need not be anything other than a simple clear-text string.
There is, for example, *NO* interface of any kind (UI or
API) anywhere in
Hello,
Thanks for these nice words.
i do not think after this one im a qualified developer , I still
have to learn a lot.
Roelof
Op 19-8-2019 om 19:54 schreef Richard Sargent:
On Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 9:40 AM Roelof Wobben wrote:
> Hello Ben,
>
> I think the purpose of this exercise was to practice expecially things
> like encapsulation and thinking in classes.
>
> So I think it's not a big deal to have a setter and a method to check if
> the passwords are matching.
>
Hello Ben,
I think the purpose of this exercise was to practice expecially
things like encapsulation and thinking in classes.
So I think it's not a big deal to have a setter and a method to
check if the passwords are matching.
Roelof
On Mon, 19 Aug 2019 at 22:19, Roelof Wobben wrote:
> Thanks all for the answers.
>
> As I see it , it impossible to store the password in the bankaccount
> object and make safe code to use it,
> So some one give me a stupid assignment.
>
That would seem to depend on the purpose of the
Thanks all for the answers.
As I see it , it impossible to store the password in the
bankaccount object and make safe code to use it,
So some one give me a stupid assignment.
Roelof
Op 19-8-2019 om 11:38 schreef Diego
Hi Jupiter.
This is always a hard problem, as you state: you want a customer to change
their own password, and also want a customer to be allowed to set a password
that he has lost. You could of course make your server code more resilient, and
demand there is security information provided when
Hi Deigo,
Apologies Roelof for jumping in to your thread. :)
This solves the issue of storing passwords, however, Richard made the case for
malevolent or broken code…
- you not only provide a getter for the
password, but a setter! This means that
malevolent/broken code
The best way to implement a password security is to never store the password,
but only a hashed password. This way, you never can have a security leak for
your passwords: because you don’t have them. And for hashing you use a standard
modern hashing algorithm, so it cannot be easily rolled
Thanks,
I implement almost everything now.
But I fail to see how to make for password a private variable
without getters and setters
and still have different password for every bankaccount and can
test against it.
So please
Op 17-8-2019 om 12:33 schreef Richard
O'Keefe:
Good-oh.
Looking at
Bankaccounts
- the name should be
singular, not plural
- Smalltalk uses
baStudlyCaps
> Call it
BankAccount.
Good-oh.
Looking at Bankaccounts
- the name should be singular, not plural
- Smalltalk uses baStudlyCaps
> Call it BankAccount.
- you not only provide a getter for the
password, but a setter! This means that
malevolent/broken code can do
aBankAccount password: 'PWNED!'.
and
Sorry, then a pointed to a wrong repo
this is the repo with smalltalk code :
https://github.com/rwobben/banking
Roelof
Op 17-8-2019 om 11:25 schreef Richard O'Keefe:
https://github.com/rwobben/bankaccount
points to a repository with C# code, so I cannot comment on the Smalltalk.
There is, however, a striking thing about the C# code, qua C#, that is
worth mentioning.
It is not encapsulated.
Let's start with the most obvious one.
A bank account has a password,
Op 17-8-2019 om 07:16 schreef Richard
O'Keefe:
What is the source of
the challenge?
Is there a version in
English?
I am having very
serious trouble trying to make sense of
"your bank accounts
What is the source of the challenge?
Is there a version in English?
I am having very serious trouble trying to make sense of
"your bank accounts can have multiple accounts for money".
I note that in your C# code a customer has an ID, a first name,
and a last name. There is nothing about this in
What did you expect
transaction = Transactions new.
to do, besides computing the answer 'false' and throwing it away?
On Fri, 16 Aug 2019 at 22:38, Roelof Wobben wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I try now to make this challege work on Pharo which is orginal a c#
> problem to practice OOP.
>
> The
Op 16-8-2019 om 15:32 schreef Ben
Coman:
and I inspect the customer I do not see the transaction added to the bankaccounts collection.
Rather than focus on what you don't
>
> and I inspect the customer I do not see the transaction added to the
> bankaccounts collection.
>
> Rather than focus on what you don't see. What do you see? And does
anything look odd about it?
cheers -ben
Hello,
I try now to make this challege work on Pharo which is orginal a c#
problem to practice OOP.
The challenge is this :
Consider the following situation:
You have a bank account. Bank account has a password which is hidden and you can access data
20 matches
Mail list logo
