Skip to main content

Single Responsibility Principle

Toata lumea a auzit de acest principiu. Pe scurt fiecare obiect trebuie sa aibe o singura responsabilitate.
Problema apare la interpretare. Fiecare persoana poate sa inteleaga diferit cand ne referim la responsabilitate.
Din cate am vazut pana acuma exista doua moduri in care se poate implementa SRP:
- fiecare metoda publica expusa de catre o clasa reprezinta o responsabilitate unica;
- fiecare obiect ar trebui sa aibe o singura responsabilitate.
Daca ne folosim de prima varianta, ajungem sa avem sute de interfete si clase abstracte, fiecare cu o singura metoda. In cazul in care respectam a doua varianta apare problema la interpretare. Cum putem spune ca o clasa are o singura responsabilitate si doar una.
De exemplu daca avem o entitate la care vrem sa adaugam metoda ToXml() am putea spune ca este corect din punct de vederea a SRP. Dar mai tarziu poate am avea nevoie de metoda ToString(). Aceste doua metode violeaza SRP.
Din pacate aceasta discutie ar putea sa continue la nesfarsit. Trebuie gasita un echilibru.
Pentru exemplul dat mai sus putem sa adaugam o metoda To() care prin intermediul unui formater sa ne returneze obiectul in formatul pe care il dorim.
Referinte: http://www.objectmentor.com/resources/articles/srp.pdf

Comments

  1. Din pacate multi programatori nu au auzit de acest principiu.. Chestia cu o singura metoda publica per clasa e clar o exagerare - Robert Martin (cel care a formulat principiul sub acest nume) explica ca prin 'responsabilitate' intelege 'reason to change'.

    Multe exemple care le da sunt voit exagerate un pic pentru a accentua ideea - ceea ce merita retinut din SRP e necesitatea de a evita aparitia de "god classes" care fac totul pentru toata lumea.
    Doar cine a avut de lucrat cu astfel de clase de baza, care combinau totul de la UI, business logic pana la persistenta, cu sute de metode publice si zeci de mii de linii de cod intelege cu adevarat importanta principiului - problema nu e la clasele cu 2-3 metode ce tin de acelasi layer si acelasi domain concept..

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

How to audit an Azure Cosmos DB

In this post, we will talk about how we can audit an Azure Cosmos DB database. Before jumping into the problem let us define the business requirement: As an Administrator I want to be able to audit all changes that were done to specific collection inside my Azure Cosmos DB. The requirement is simple, but can be a little tricky to implement fully. First of all when you are using Azure Cosmos DB or any other storage solution there are 99% odds that you’ll have more than one system that writes data to it. This means that you have or not have control on the systems that are doing any create/update/delete operations. Solution 1: Diagnostic Logs Cosmos DB allows us activate diagnostics logs and stream the output a storage account for achieving to other systems like Event Hub or Log Analytics. This would allow us to have information related to who, when, what, response code and how the access operation to our Cosmos DB was done. Beside this there is a field that specifies what was th...

Can User Technical Profile Influence AI Architecture Decisions?

In the last few days, I ran a small experiment on Devin/Windsurf/Cascade, BMAD, and LLM-based architecture decisions. The initial concern was simple: if an AI coding assistant knows something about the user, for example, that the user is a Java developer or a .NET developer, can this information influence the architecture and technology stack that the AI will propose? This question is important because many companies are starting to use AI tools not only for coding but also for product discovery, architecture, documentation, and technical decision-making. If the AI is influenced by the developer's personal profile, the result may not be fully neutral. It may look like a business or architecture decision, but in reality, it may be partially shaped by the context of the person using the tool. The test was done using BMAD with Devin/Windsurf/Cascade. The scenario was a unified field service operations platform. The task was to let BMAD refine the product, define the architecture and s...

ADO.NET provider with invariant name 'System.Data.SqlClient' could not be loaded

Today blog post will be started with the following error when running DB tests on the CI machine: threw exception: System.InvalidOperationException: The Entity Framework provider type 'System.Data.Entity.SqlServer.SqlProviderServices, EntityFramework.SqlServer' registered in the application config file for the ADO.NET provider with invariant name 'System.Data.SqlClient' could not be loaded. Make sure that the assembly-qualified name is used and that the assembly is available to the running application. See http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=260882 for more information. at System.Data.Entity.Infrastructure.DependencyResolution.ProviderServicesFactory.GetInstance(String providerTypeName, String providerInvariantName) This error happened only on the Continuous Integration machine. On the devs machines, everything has fine. The classic problem – on my machine it’s working. The CI has the following configuration: TeamCity .NET 4.51 EF 6.0.2 VS2013 It see...