On Jan 1, 2014, at 4:28 PM, Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> wrote:
Ok, but let's get concrete. What does better mean in this case?
I think we could all learn from each other's examples.
Relations/Collaborations with other classes Invariant internal representations for real (description of implementation) + examples.
Stef
This made me remember this book pattern: http://www.amazon.com/Design-Patterns-Elements-Reusable-Object-Oriented/dp/0... I mean, the book is about patterns but it has a beautiful editorial pattern itself for a reference book. For every pattern it defines: 1. Intent 2. Motivation 3. Applicability 4. Sample Code 5. Known Uses Let's say that doing that for every class is too much, then what about: 1. intent 2. applicability and or known uses 3. sample code (very optional) sebastian o/