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: 
537 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 (...) (22 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
    

Custom Search

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