Thursday, August 31, 2006

Why delegate is better than interface – in some situations

I know the mechanics of delegate, but I do not really “appreciate” it: I always ask myself: why I should use delegate, instead of interface?

Here is the answer:
http://www.artima.com/intv/simplexity2.html

Basically, if you delegates, it means the signatures are the same; this “coincide” with that convention that when you use delegates, always use the same signature – do not be creative – it all make sense now: delegates/events are simple and mundane “interfaces” -- just like “properties” are get/set methods, which is mentioned in http://www.artima.com/intv/simplexity3.html


C# cleaned up Java’s get/set and simple interfaces, and that is the difference between “class programming” and “component programming”, in simple terms.

2 Comments:

Blogger survic said...

Just a note: this “in simple terms” is a serious insight, while at same time kind of humorous, isn't it.

9/01/2006 10:49:00 PM  
Blogger survic said...

In case you wonder what is the "serious treatment", check out the book:

Programming .NET Components, 2nd Edition
By Juval Lowy


I bought its first edition; and I read it from http://safari.oreilly.com/mybookshelf
time to time.

Mr. Lowy's "component" is more platform oriented; for day to day modeling and programming, set/get and semi-fixed interface is all about "component".

Mr. Lowy's "component" is more platform-oriented; for day to day modeling and programming, set/get and semi-fixed interface is all about "component". If you do not know this insight, it means you have not got OO yet – the reason is simple: in pure OO, there are no such things like property and events; you got to “reduce” them, and reduce them in a sweet and easy way.

9/09/2006 03:05:00 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home