Re: [Corelinux-public] AbstractFactory again...

[Frank V. C. <fr...@co...>]

Joe Nelson wrote:
> 
> > Can I get a amen?
> 
> I'd give you a yay or nay if I knew more about that pattern. I better go
> stick my nose into the design patterns book again... :}
> 
> --Joe
> 

Keep in mind that many of the patterns are not derived from some tool
kit of pattern types but are declared in the problem domain. What my
intention has been, for the types we have so far implemented, is to make
it easier for implementations without the redundancy, thereby increasing
reusability and reasoning capabilities.

Given that as a premise, what would you want from a pattern abstraction?
Would it be full implementation? Would it be partial with domain
derivation capability? A rhetorical question but one meant to elicit the
difficulty in making a class library design decision.

-- 
Frank V. Castellucci
http://corelinux.sourceforge.net
OOA/OOD/C++ Standards and Guidelines for Linux