Re: Policy-based class design or inheritance?
On Sep 29, 2:04 pm, puzzlecracker <ironsel2...@gmail.com> wrote:
It seems that both approaches need to include A.h file, hence original
coupling persist. I would use stratagy and passing a pointer (evia
ctor or setter) to AToStderr class
IMO, there is nothing wrong with including A.h. We should remember
that the whole reason for #include'ing in the first place was to
create the very interdependence that you hope to avoid.
There is beauty and benefit in a certain type of interdependence. It
is the basis of form. If you kill it, the system becomes wobbly, held
together by flimsy ligaments, demanding that the designer remain
perpetually cognizant how things are linked and what treachery might
arise because the designer assumed a role best relegated to a
compiler.
I think it is tragic that some promiment authors have promoted
gettting rid of this interdepence using PIMPL and other techniques
just for sake of faster compilation and other trivial reasons.
[However, there are non-trivial reasons where breaking interdependence
is not only warranted, but necessary.]
class OutputToStderr {
static void setPrinter(Printer *printer) {
_printer=printer;
}
print();
private:
static Printer _printer
};
Would not a reference be better?
-Le Chaud Lapin-
--
[ See http://www.gotw.ca/resources/clcm.htm for info about ]
[ comp.lang.c++.moderated. First time posters: Do this! ]