2 added 8 characters in body
source | link

There is no issue from an OO perspective. You could have a static class GasLaw offering methods

GetVolume(R, T, P) GetPressure(R, T, v)

GetVolume(R, T, P) 
GetPressure(R, T, v)

et cetera

and there would not be a duplication issue. There is no object, no data members. Just behaviors that are all different.

You may regard the gas law as "one thing" but the operations are all distinct. There is nothing wrong with having a method for each of the law's use cases.

There is no issue from an OO perspective. You could have a static class GasLaw offering methods

GetVolume(R, T, P) GetPressure(R, T, v)

et cetera

and there would not be a duplication issue. There is no object, no data members. Just behaviors that are all different.

You may regard the gas law as "one thing" but the operations are all distinct. There is nothing wrong with having a method for each of the law's use cases.

There is no issue from an OO perspective. You could have a static class GasLaw offering methods

GetVolume(R, T, P) 
GetPressure(R, T, v)

et cetera

and there would not be a duplication issue. There is no object, no data members. Just behaviors that are all different.

You may regard the gas law as "one thing" but the operations are all distinct. There is nothing wrong with having a method for each of the law's use cases.

1
source | link

There is no issue from an OO perspective. You could have a static class GasLaw offering methods

GetVolume(R, T, P) GetPressure(R, T, v)

et cetera

and there would not be a duplication issue. There is no object, no data members. Just behaviors that are all different.

You may regard the gas law as "one thing" but the operations are all distinct. There is nothing wrong with having a method for each of the law's use cases.