Subject: DIY - Home Improvement Gift-card

From: Home Improvement Gift-Card <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2014 13:17:14 -0700

Trouble Viewing the Image Below? Click Here to Redeem Gift Card

Do you shop at Home Depot?

Share Your Opinion and Home Depot experiences

by completing the survey and be eligible to win $1,000

Redeem Gift-Card Here!

Tool & Truck Rental | Installation Services & Repair | Help |

To customize the settings for your profile and subscriptions,click here or write to Current Update Alerts

at 1644 Doral Dr Brookings, SD 57006

s @jeshurun - I have read it. (& recommend the book for design patterns). I'd have liked the book to get serious before it got over :) - As for the example, could be... head-first examples generally are "sticky". Gishu Jun 22 '11, but it may miss something : "Does TypeB want to expose the complete interface (all public methods no less) of TypeA such that TypeB can be used where TypeA is expected?" But what if this is true, and TypeB also expose the complete interface of TypeC ? And what if TypeC hasn't been modeled yallude to what I think should be the most basic test: "Should this object be usable by code which expects objects of (what would be) the base type". If the answer is yes, the object must inherit. If no, then it probably should not. If I had my druthers, languages would provide a keyword to refer to "this class", and provide a means of defining a class which should behave just like another class, but n
ot be substitutable for it (such a class would have all "this class" references replaced with itself). ngle problem". Is "airplane" here an abstract class, one that does not fly and only has some specifications on paper? I prefer to think of inheritance examples like: "RedToyota < UnpaintedToyota < ToyotaChassis". - the point is 'Can I pass in a Cessna biplane to all clients that expect an airplane without surprising them?'. If yes, then chances are you want inheritance. Gishserves as an abstract class, that is like an "interface" for customer. I was trying to think of a good analogy of inheritance of ready-to-use classes. I've heard that OOP originated in an attempt to model states and changes of states of real-life objects, but IMO in real life it makes no sense to say that Bus and Motorcycle inherit from MotorVehicle. Alexeylutions. Many of the above examples could possibly be better explained using those approaches your
comment is a good way to explain how to make the choice. If you cannot change the type of object a method accepts, then you are forced to subclass. Otherwise your example fails the "is a" test: RedToyota is not a ToyotaChassis, so RedToyota shouldn't inherit from ToyotaChassis. Likewise, CessnaBiplanePilot "is a" gle (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circle-ellipse_problem). I am not convinced that without further precisions "is a" is a meaningful test. I can say that RedToyota is a ToyotaChassis with some stuff mounded on it (which i may not need). And i can say that CessnaBiplanePilot knows at least as much as an average PilotSchoolStudent, and could take notes or pass exams in his place. nds on what you meant by Square and Rectangle. One you've properly defined the properties you want out of a Square and a Rectangle, the Circle-Ellipse problem will have an obvious solution.