On Fri, 2004-04-23 at 11:44, Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon wrote:
> Aaron Sherman wrote:
> > class c { does a for <<bar baz>>; does b for <<foo biz>>; }
> Funny how similar that is to
>
> class c { does a handles <<bar baz>>; does b handles <<foo biz>>; }
In "Relationship to Roles" A12 makes the point that delegation and roles
are not the same thing.
To tie them together with C<handles> MIGHT be wise and might not. I'll
have to think about that and see what others post on the topic.
I have not read the delegation section enough, either... something I
need to fix. It certainly seems powerful, as it merges the "has" and
"is" relationship in some very interesting ways, and eliminates some
overhead that would appear in many classes that would have otherwise had
to re-dispatch methods pertaining to their encapsulees.
--
Aaron Sherman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Senior Systems Engineer and Toolsmith
"It's the sound of a satellite saying, 'get me down!'" -Shriekback
