MVC in "Head First Design Patterns" - I am confused.
in [OOP]
|
Prev: [ANN] Free Session: In-the-Brain of Martine Devos on Agile Estimation & Planning
Next: Modularity problems with multiple dispatch (was: Scala and problemswith OOP)
From: topmind on 21 Nov 2007 11:52 Michael Redlich wrote: > > > > Let me reword that: real developers would be embarrassed to purchase a > > book with that kind of cover (which is mirrored in the page photos > > also). > > > > It just looks newbie-ish. Maybe I'm just an old foggie who is not hip > > to the styles. > > > > > > I'm probably older than you, so I don't need to hear the old foggie > bit. The Head First series of books explains concepts in a way that > make you understand instead of remembering. There is an old saying: > If you understand, you don't have to remember... > > Why don't you try reading the section of the book that explains their > teaching paradigm instead of looking for a disclaimer about their > examples... There's two big issues with OO patterns: 1. What are they, and 2. When/ where to use them (or not use them). I won't dispute that Head-First may address 1 well, but is lousy and perhaps outright misleading about addressing the 2nd. Do you agree with my criticism of #2? > > I suppose we can agree to disagree... > > Mike. -T-
From: Daniel Pitts on 21 Nov 2007 14:26 topmind wrote: > > Michael Redlich wrote: >>> Let me reword that: real developers would be embarrassed to purchase a >>> book with that kind of cover (which is mirrored in the page photos >>> also). >>> >>> It just looks newbie-ish. Maybe I'm just an old foggie who is not hip >>> to the styles. >>> >>> >> I'm probably older than you, so I don't need to hear the old foggie >> bit. The Head First series of books explains concepts in a way that >> make you understand instead of remembering. There is an old saying: >> If you understand, you don't have to remember... >> >> Why don't you try reading the section of the book that explains their >> teaching paradigm instead of looking for a disclaimer about their >> examples... > > There's two big issues with OO patterns: 1. What are they, and 2. When/ > where to use them (or not use them). > > I won't dispute that Head-First may address 1 well, but is lousy and > perhaps outright misleading about addressing the 2nd. Do you agree > with my criticism of #2? I think the discussions in Fowler's /Refactoring/ addresses #2 quite well. I haven't read Head First, so I'm not sure how it compares. > >> I suppose we can agree to disagree... >> >> Mike. > > -T- -- Daniel Pitts' Tech Blog: <http://virtualinfinity.net/wordpress/>
From: topmind on 22 Nov 2007 15:28 Daniel Pitts wrote: > topmind wrote: > > > > Michael Redlich wrote: > >>> Let me reword that: real developers would be embarrassed to purchase a > >>> book with that kind of cover (which is mirrored in the page photos > >>> also). > >>> > >>> It just looks newbie-ish. Maybe I'm just an old foggie who is not hip > >>> to the styles. > >>> > >>> > >> I'm probably older than you, so I don't need to hear the old foggie > >> bit. The Head First series of books explains concepts in a way that > >> make you understand instead of remembering. There is an old saying: > >> If you understand, you don't have to remember... > >> > >> Why don't you try reading the section of the book that explains their > >> teaching paradigm instead of looking for a disclaimer about their > >> examples... > > > > There's two big issues with OO patterns: 1. What are they, and 2. When/ > > where to use them (or not use them). > > > > I won't dispute that Head-First may address 1 well, but is lousy and > > perhaps outright misleading about addressing the 2nd. Do you agree > > with my criticism of #2? > I think the discussions in Fowler's /Refactoring/ addresses #2 quite > well. I haven't read Head First, so I'm not sure how it compares. Fowler's work is not scientific. He doesn't compare and contrast the tradeoffs with much rigor. And, he doesn't utilize databases well, at least not in his examples. But, that's another book. > > > >> I suppose we can agree to disagree... > >> > >> Mike. > > > > -T- > > > -- > Daniel Pitts' Tech Blog: <http://virtualinfinity.net/wordpress/> -T-
From: Michael Redlich on 23 Nov 2007 11:42 On Nov 21, 11:52 am, topmind <topm...(a)technologist.com> wrote: > > There's two big issues with OO patterns: 1. What are they, and 2. When/ > where to use them (or not use them). > > I won't dispute that Head-First may address 1 well, but is lousy and > perhaps outright misleading about addressing the 2nd. Do you agree > with my criticism of #2? > topmind: I just had a chance to thumb through the HFDP book, and I can see your point by criticism #2. While the authors do an excellent job of comparing design patterns (DPs) that are similar, e.g., Decorator and Adapter, I don't see a whole lot about the consequences of using them. The "Thinking in Patterns" section of the book (page 594) seems to be the only place where this is mentioned. The original GoF book talks more about the consequences of each pattern. I probably overlooked this point since I've been studying DPs for the past five years. What I first started learning DPs, I thought they were used strictly for GUI applications. All of the examples in James Cooper's book, "Java Design Patterns: A Tutorial," demonstrate small GUI applications. I was pleased to see that the HFDP book addressed those important design principles in conjunction with the patterns and used more useful examples that can be adapted (no pun intended) to real- world applications. Maybe by osmosis, readers would be able to understand the context into which to use DPs. However, maybe the authors should have been more explicit about it. Anyway, good discussion about this. Bottom line - no book is perfect. This is why I have multiple books on a variety of Java- related subjects. I still highly recommend the HFDP book because of the way DPs are explained and how they are applied. Later... Mike. --- Michael Redlich ACGNJ Java Users Group http://www.javasig.org/ (best viewed in Firefox for the time being...)
From: topmind on 28 Nov 2007 15:41
Michael Redlich wrote: > On Nov 21, 11:52 am, topmind <topm...(a)technologist.com> wrote: > > > > > There's two big issues with OO patterns: 1. What are they, and 2. When/ > > where to use them (or not use them). > > > > I won't dispute that Head-First may address 1 well, but is lousy and > > perhaps outright misleading about addressing the 2nd. Do you agree > > with my criticism of #2? > > > > topmind: > > I just had a chance to thumb through the HFDP book, and I can see your > point by criticism #2. While the authors do an excellent job of > comparing design patterns (DPs) that are similar, e.g., Decorator and > Adapter, I don't see a whole lot about the consequences of using > them. The "Thinking in Patterns" section of the book (page 594) seems > to be the only place where this is mentioned. The original GoF book > talks more about the consequences of each pattern. I probably > overlooked this point since I've been studying DPs for the past five > years. > > What I first started learning DPs, I thought they were used strictly > for GUI applications. All of the examples in James Cooper's book, > "Java Design Patterns: A Tutorial," demonstrate small GUI > applications. I was pleased to see that the HFDP book addressed those > important design principles in conjunction with the patterns and used > more useful examples that can be adapted (no pun intended) to real- > world applications. Maybe by osmosis, readers would be able to > understand the context into which to use DPs. However, maybe the > authors should have been more explicit about it. > > Anyway, good discussion about this. Bottom line - no book is > perfect. This is why I have multiple books on a variety of Java- > related subjects. > > I still highly recommend the HFDP book because of the way DPs are > explained and how they are applied. Let me see if I am getting this strait. You are praising HFDP for using pattern examples outside of GUI's (overused topic), but agree that the use of such patterns may not be warrented for real-world versions of said non-GUI examples? (The "hard-wired category" issue.) Isn't this praising them for merely being different rather than being *right*? If so, I disagree that HFDP deserves kudos for such. Being wrong differently is still being wrong. > > Later... > > Mike. > > --- > Michael Redlich > ACGNJ Java Users Group > http://www.javasig.org/ (best viewed in Firefox for the time being...) -T- oop.ismad.com |