Probably not telling you anything you don't already know...

Post #156,657 by ChrisR 5/24/04 2:59:25 PM Reply	Probably not telling you anything you don't already know... ...but that example was originally started by Jim Weirich on Freep's OOP board. JohnU also got involved. Of course, since EZBoard decided to shut down the inactive boards, we don't have any extant to refer to. The reason I like the EZBoard example is (a) it's working (or soon to be working) code - the code can be objectively tested for performance and features; (b) it's something that we share in common and can immediately reap the benefits of any new ideas. So, yes, let's dispense with code fragments and toy code.
Post #156,658 by admin 5/24/04 3:02:11 PM Reply	I take it you mean... ... "IWETHEY example", and not "EZBoard example"? Regards, -scott anderson "Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson..."
Post #156,659 by ChrisR 5/24/04 3:09:53 PM Reply	Yep = That's what I meant The reporting example was fine, it's just that there was no measurable way to run the code and verify for correctness and performance.
Post #156,695 by JimWeirich 5/24/04 4:55:09 PM Reply	Re: Probably not telling you anything you don't already know ...but that example was originally started by Jim Weirich on Freep's OOP board Actually, the problem was introduced by someone else (JohnU perhaps?). Bryce actually wrote some (non-working) psuedo-code for it. All I did was translate Bryce's non-working psuedo-code into working Ruby code. Then I refactored to a better written procedural version and finally made it more flexible by introducing some polymorphism. I always thought the problem description was a little screwy (I never really understood the need for some the the requirements), but at least we had some form of code from Bryce to compare to. And the OO code compared very favorably with the procedural version (e.g. comparable code sizes (no bloat), polymorphism without taxinomy). At least, that's how I remember it. -- -- Jim Weirich jim@weirichhouse.org [link\|http://onestepback.org\|http://onestepback.org] --------------------------------------------------------------------- "Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not tried it." -- Donald Knuth (in a memo to Peter van Emde Boas)
Post #156,700 by ChrisR 5/24/04 5:12:43 PM Reply	My memory is too taxed Not sure why I thought you initiated the sample. But your recollection does sound about right. Sure wish we hadn't lost the EZBoard archives. For that matter, I wish Freep would come visit every once in a while.
Post #156,704 by tablizer 5/24/04 5:16:58 PM Reply	Memory Lane I always thought the problem description was a little screwy (I never really understood the need for some the the requirements) We kind of never agreed on the scope. And the OO code compared very favorably with the procedural version (e.g. comparable code sizes (no bloat), polymorphism without taxinomy). If I remember correctly, you implemented a different set of features than mine, so that we really couldn't compare code-to-code for many parts, but rather focused on the architecture issues. ________________ oop.ismad.com

Welcome to IWETHEY!