From: Robert Klemme <shortcutter@...>
Date: 2008-03-11T06:19:55+09:00
Subject: Re: Which is better -- method option or multiple methods?

On 10.03.2008 20:50, Paul Mckibbin wrote:
> Robert Klemme wrote:
>> On 10.03.2008 20:09, Paul Mckibbin wrote:
>>> Method options are better if you ever want to extend it.
>> How is that?  How can a single method that switches over one or more
>> arguments to decide what to do be easier extended?  What if you detect
>> that the new or one of the algorithms needs an additional argument which
>> is not needed by other algorithms?
>>
>>> I personally 
>>> would have both in library code, but would be inclined to keep the 
>>> multiple method code private to keep the interface clean.
>> A clean interface in my world is one where one method does exactly one
>> thing - and not multiple things.  If all those algorithms share some
>> common code this should go into another method that all of them use.
>> Much cleaner, more maintainable and easier to understand.  Just think
>> about a method's documentation, that can do 5 different things vs. five
>> methods with their own documentation.
> 
> You are quite right. My code showed what I intended, but I garbled the 

To be honest, I just briefly looked at the code because it looked too 
similar to the original. :-)  But even then I would have asked how your 
explanation and code fit together. :-)

> explanation. Single method with switches should be private for 
> implementation, and I tend to use that to make the code DRYer. Multiple 
> methods for the exposed interface.
> Normally I'd start with multiple (separate) methods and create the 
> private function when there was an obvious need to refactor and 
> opportunity to make the code DRYer.

Yep, same here.

Kind regards

	robert