▲ | ahartmetz 4 days ago | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
I think of design patterns as possible solutions to certain problems. They should be used when the corresponding problem arises and their mental overhead is less than whatever the alternatives may be. I use them quite sparingly. I don't find them very useful (today) to understand existing systems that don't intentionally use the patterns. They don't occur very often in well-designed systems in the first place, even less so unintentionally. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
▲ | ozim 4 days ago | parent [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
First of all design patterns were not some god given solutions. Those are solutions gathered from existing implementations and authors just gave names to those solutions. So they will be present in well designed systems just that they are not called by their „book name”. Then I clearly see it in all new frameworks just that each framework has their own name for implementation of the pattern. Patterns were mostly named so people can discuss easier about solutions that are there. I will quote first sentence of foreword from my copy of the book „All well-structured object oriented architectures are full of patterns.” | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|