Kcpeppe at 19:00, 4 July 2009

Kcpeppe — Sat, 04 Jul 2009 19:00:10 GMT

←Older revision		Revision as of 19:00, 4 July 2009
Line 2:		Line 2:

	--[[User:Michael Hunger\|Michael Hunger]] 18:28, 26 January 2009 (PST)		--[[User:Michael Hunger\|Michael Hunger]] 18:28, 26 January 2009 (PST)
		+
		+	I'm not inclined to use an enum here as there is no natural ordering. In this case using an interface offers a clean separation of concerns IMHO.

Michael Hunger: New page: You could also use the AccountType enum as strategy and delegate the computation to it. So that would mean delegation instead of inheritance. --~~~~

Michael Hunger — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 02:28:40 GMT

New page: You could also use the AccountType enum as strategy and delegate the computation to it. So that would mean delegation instead of inheritance. --~~~~

New page

You could also use the AccountType enum as strategy and delegate the computation to it. So that would mean delegation instead of inheritance.

--[[User:Michael Hunger|Michael Hunger]] 18:28, 26 January 2009 (PST)

Talk:Missing Opportunities for Polymorphism - Revision history

Kcpeppe at 19:00, 4 July 2009

Michael Hunger: New page: You could also use the AccountType enum as strategy and delegate the computation to it. So that would mean delegation instead of inheritance. --~~~~