Timeline for Would this violate the Liskov Substitution Principle?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
11 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 4, 2021 at 0:44 | answer | added | Kaz | timeline score: 1 | |
| Jun 3, 2021 at 9:44 | answer | added | Flater | timeline score: 2 | |
| Jun 3, 2021 at 9:19 | vote | accept | Jeto | ||
| Jun 2, 2021 at 23:33 | comment | added | Jeto | ^ actually ignore this, that's a bad example. See the bottom part of my edited question instead (also mentioned in below answer). | |
| Jun 2, 2021 at 23:33 | history | edited | Jeto | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 3346 characters in body
|
| Jun 2, 2021 at 22:25 | answer | added | IMSoP | timeline score: 3 | |
| Jun 2, 2021 at 22:07 | answer | added | Christophe | timeline score: 2 | |
| Jun 2, 2021 at 18:16 | comment | added | Jeto |
@TannerSwett If we imagine a service class which has a method that takes an OldInterface object as parameter, and that sometimes needs to convert them to their new form. That service's constructor could be injected with an OldToNewConverterInterface instance without having to know which concrete object it will be. Here's a quick example. Also it would seem a bit of a shame to have dozens of Old<X>ToNew<X>ConverterInterface versions with mostly the same contract and the same idea (convert old -> new) without being able to enforce it across all.
|
|
| Jun 2, 2021 at 17:46 | comment | added | Sophie Swett |
What's the purpose of the OldToNewConverterInterface interface? What benefit does it give you over, say, having an OldAToNewAConverterInterface interface, an OldBToNewBConverterInterface interface, and so forth?
|
|
| Jun 2, 2021 at 17:37 | history | edited | Jeto | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 173 characters in body
|
| Jun 2, 2021 at 15:44 | history | asked | Jeto | CC BY-SA 4.0 |