ShouldBeImplemented - this was supposed to be already implemented

This is a stronger form of communication where some abstract behaviour should have been implemented. If this is received in code then this should be considered an error as a base class expects derived classes to have the behaviour or the class will not work as expected.

NotYetImplemented - this will be implemented in very soon

This is a weaker form of some missing behaviour. This is used to communicate that some behaviour has not been implemented yet, and it would be nice if it was but the rest of the object is still functional. If you'd like the behaviour either harass the owner or write it yourself. Sometime this usage is abused and developers create objects that are not polymorphic and typically break Liskov's Substitution Principle for example.

So I would suggest keep the 2 as they communicate different ideas.

On 29 Sep 2015, at 9:44 AM, stepharo <stepharo@free.fr> wrote:

To me NotYetImplemented is not needed => should be implemented is enough

Le 28/9/15 21:09, Peter Uhn��k a ��crit :

What is the difference?

��

ShouldBeImplemented

I am ShouldBeImplemented, an exception signaled when some method should have been implemented but was not.

This is more like a placeholder during development.

��

NotYetImplemented

I am NotYetImplement, an exception signaled when a method is a stub for code that will be implemented in the future.

This is used in incremental development, for example when doing Test First development.

It is similar to ShouldBeImplemented, with a slightly different meaning.

��

There seem to be some slight semantic difference but I'm failing to see it.

I can even say "The method should be implemented, but is not yet implemented." It's saying the same thing with different words.

Thanks,

Peter