RE: [Rails-devel] Granular model/view

[Brett L. <wak...@ea...>]

>> Looking a bit more at the code... ok, I see how you're 
>> implementing it. Now it makes a bit more sense.
>> 
>> So, what's the difference between Cash and Money?

>Nothing.
 

We should probably keep one and delete the other. ;-)


>> Worth doesn't seem to make a whole lot of sense to me. It's 
>> not storing any information of its own, but is instead 
>> calling methods in Player.  So, if this information isn't 
>> something that we can abstract out, why should we make things 
>> more complicated by making a new Class?

>To fit into the generic way that the new Field class updates itself:
>via the toString() method of any ModelObject subclass.
 

Ah ha.  That makes lots of sense. Very good.


>> In the end, Cash and Trains make sense to me. Price seems 
>> like it could extend from Cash, because a Price is just an 
>> amount of Cash. The others don't really look like we need them. 

>No, Price embeds a StockSpace, Cash embeds an int.
>I could probably find a way to merge these classes,
>by representing price by an int as well as a StockSpace.
>But that would require extra update code in PublicCompany,
>so it does not really reduce complexity to me.


Would it make sense for Price to extend from Cash instead of from ModelObject?  Would the inherited methods add any value?


---Brett.