Comments on: Coding: Weak/Strong APIs http://www.markhneedham.com/blog/2009/04/27/coding-weakstrong-apis/ Thoughts on Software Development Sat, 11 Feb 2012 23:17:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Book Club: Arguments and Results (James Noble) at Mark Needham http://www.markhneedham.com/blog/2009/04/27/coding-weakstrong-apis/comment-page-1/#comment-18733 Book Club: Arguments and Results (James Noble) at Mark Needham Tue, 16 Jun 2009 13:38:57 +0000 http://www.markhneedham.com/blog/?p=1173#comment-18733 [...] of this approach is that we make it more difficult for clients to use our API. I think this was best summed up in a comment on a post I wrote about using weak or strong APIs by [...] [...] of this approach is that we make it more difficult for clients to use our API. I think this was best summed up in a comment on a post I wrote about using weak or strong APIs by [...]

]]> By: Eric http://www.markhneedham.com/blog/2009/04/27/coding-weakstrong-apis/comment-page-1/#comment-15672 Eric Thu, 30 Apr 2009 01:22:58 +0000 http://www.markhneedham.com/blog/?p=1173#comment-15672 The choice is between passing (1) what the client probably has on hand already (the pieces) vs. passing (2) what the class demands (a pre-formed object). Which serves the client better and more naturally? Which brick-and-mortar shop gets more business--the one taking credit cards (already in the customers' hands), or the one demanding cash in some foreign currency (which the customers first have to go get)? Subordinate the service's convenience to the client's. Accept what a client likely has at the ready. (At the least, offer an overloaded constructor that does so.) The choice is between passing (1) what the client probably has on hand already (the pieces) vs. passing (2) what the class demands (a pre-formed object). Which serves the client better and more naturally?

Which brick-and-mortar shop gets more business–the one taking credit cards (already in the customers’ hands), or the one demanding cash in some foreign currency (which the customers first have to go get)?

Subordinate the service’s convenience to the client’s. Accept what a client likely has at the ready. (At the least, offer an overloaded constructor that does so.)

]]> By: Maciek Szymanski http://www.markhneedham.com/blog/2009/04/27/coding-weakstrong-apis/comment-page-1/#comment-15467 Maciek Szymanski Mon, 27 Apr 2009 12:43:59 +0000 http://www.markhneedham.com/blog/?p=1173#comment-15467 Hi Mark, I'm in favor of the former API, too. As a TDD very (very) beginer I'd say mocking PropertyDifference and putting PropertyDifferences under test would be much easier for me. PropertyDifferences seems to be ordinary collection, some place to store object differences, so I woudn't expect its responsibility to 'create' but to 'operate on' its items. The later API also suggests that PropertyDifference can not exist without PropertyDifferences, that PropertyDifference is only valid within PropertyDifferences. Maybe that's just my feeling. Maciek Hi Mark,

I’m in favor of the former API, too. As a TDD very (very) beginer I’d say mocking PropertyDifference and putting PropertyDifferences under test would be much easier for me. PropertyDifferences seems to be ordinary collection, some place to store object differences, so I woudn’t expect its responsibility to ‘create’ but to ‘operate on’ its items. The later API also suggests that PropertyDifference can not exist without PropertyDifferences, that PropertyDifference is only valid within PropertyDifferences. Maybe that’s just my feeling.

Maciek

]]> By: Rafael Peixoto de Azevedo http://www.markhneedham.com/blog/2009/04/27/coding-weakstrong-apis/comment-page-1/#comment-15462 Rafael Peixoto de Azevedo Mon, 27 Apr 2009 11:20:04 +0000 http://www.markhneedham.com/blog/?p=1173#comment-15462 Hi, Mark What really called my attention is the reference to property names and property values at this point. I expect this detailed information to be already abstracted by a Property value object, so the question would be to use Property objects or PropertyDifference objects in the API. Cheers, Rafael Hi, Mark

What really called my attention is the reference to property names and property values at this point.

I expect this detailed information to be already abstracted by a Property value object, so the question would be to use Property objects or PropertyDifference objects in the API.

Cheers, Rafael

]]>