The question seems to be quite vague, so let me give some background:
I have given the concept of design patterns some thought and stumbled upon the classification used by the Gang of Four:
- Creational Patterns
- Structural Patterns
- Behavioural Patterns
Since design patterns are intended to be solutions for common design problems, the classification should apply to not only to the patterns but to the underlying problems as well.
Somehow the classification seems to make sense and I find it hard to figure out a design problem that cannot be put into one of these categories. On the other hand I find it somehow arbitrary.
Isn't creation a kind of behaviour? Doesn't it sometimes depend on the point of view if something classifies as behavioural or as structural? Why are there creational patterns but no 'destructional' ones?
Is this classification an invention of the Gang of Four or has it been used before? Can it be derived from some theory? Are there alternatives?
While this question is related to my previous one, it differs in two aspects:
- It is about the classification scheme and not about the patterns themselves.
- It is not about patterns but about the design problems intended to be solved by patterns.