clipka wrote:
> Now that's a problem indeed: Changing a contract is a particularly 
> problematic change. Because that's why contracts are there in the first 
> place.

Right. This is why I laugh at all the people that tell me to just write unit 
tests and everything will be fine.

> Note that a good contract places as many constraints on /both/ parties 
> as possible, to get some "room to breathe" in case either side needs to 
> be modified.

This assumes you're not making fundamental changes like adding a new level 
of heirarchy to the product catalog or a new kind of management operation or 
whatever.  Depending on what you code in your contracts, they can really get 
in the way.

> Maybe, but at any rate OO has been the most influential of these in the 
> last decades.

Yes. See OP. ;-)

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".

Post a reply to this message