To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.cad.devOpen lugnet.cad.dev in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 CAD / Development / 6882
6881  |  6883
Subject: 
Re: A comprehensive LDraw object model
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.cad.dev
Date: 
Sun, 10 Feb 2002 17:59:36 GMT
Viewed: 
1955 times
  
In lugnet.cad.dev, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> First, this is a nifty idea. Objectifying this is long overdue. But I was
> struck wondering, is this trying to objectify the current dat format as it
> is, or an ideal one as we would like to see it be...

Well, this raises the point:  what ideal is the LDraw format aiming for?  I
don't think it's really going anywhere; any real change to the format would
break compatability with the legacy LDRAW.EXE.

I'm proposing a class library for the existing codebase and modelbase that
is already out there.

> Also, are you a fan of the MVC paradigm/pattern? (I am... MVC = Model View
> Controller)
> If you are, are all these classes supposed to be part of Model? Stuff like
> the renderer class seems more part of View, either you may have some
> muddiness, or I may not be seeing intent clearly.

It's true that a renderer is a View object, but why can't you have Models,
Views, and Controllers in the same class library?

The Controller aspect, is, of course, the API -- in the sense that you use
it to modify elements in the Model.

> Also, do you have an object diagram whipped up that you can share? I find
> when I'm modeling it's often better to start from an object diagram and let
> inheritance take care of itself. Relations among objects are often the most
> important things about them.

Here's my Javadoc of *working* code as of today:

http://www.io.com/~jsproat/temp/jjld/api/

I don't intend this to be the foundation of anything we develop; it's merely
what I wrote last week and propose as a general class structure.

Cheers,
- jsproat



Message is in Reply To:
  Re: A comprehensive LDraw object model
 
(...) <snip> First, this is a nifty idea. Objectifying this is long overdue. But I was struck wondering, is this trying to objectify the current dat format as it is, or an ideal one as we would like to see it be... Also, are you a fan of the MVC (...) (25 years ago, 10-Feb-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)

30 Messages in This Thread:











Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR