Re: Really "BIG" class name wanted

From:

Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li>

Newsgroups:

comp.lang.java.programmer

Date:

Fri, 29 Jul 2011 15:08:30 +0100

Message-ID:

<alpine.DEB.2.00.1107291456220.5272@urchin.earth.li>

On Fri, 29 Jul 2011, Ross wrote:

I'm really confident that what I am doing is a really good idea. A lot
of things that were tricky and/or non-intuitive or complicated have
suddenly simplified right down, and it's a much, much, better structure
program now than before I had this class. A fair number of classes which
before had long and complex argument lists in their constructors now
take one argument. And I find that when I find that I DO need access to
the properties from one particular class, I just get them from this
"central" object, and don't have to go around changing constructor calls
elsewhere.

The usual response to this situation is to use dependency injection. You
write objects without worrying too much about how they will get references
to each other, then use some sort of container to wire them up. If you
have a lot of singleton objects, as it sounds like you do, then you can
use a fairly simple type- or annotation-driven injection system like Guice
or CDI to inject dependencies.

I am uncertain whether this is actually better than having a God Object -
sorry, application context - sitting in the middle of the system waving
little static tentacles around, but it'll get you more brownie points.

tom

--
Watched Blade Runner again last night. Still think the new edition should
end with Harrison Ford staring blankly at a captcha. -- Quintin Smith