|Is it correct to say EMF uses the decorator pattern by default? [message #1744286]
||Fri, 23 September 2016 22:00
| Paul Roubekas
Registered: March 2012
Location: Chattanooga, TN USA
This forum thread (https://www.eclipse.org/forums/index.php/t/130833/) seems to hint that EMF uses the decorator pattern by default. But the EMF book Second Edition, section 10.6, does not explicitly say that EMF implements the decorator pattern. I looked at the code that is generated by my EMF *.gemodel(s) and it looks like any leaf class in an object hierarchy extends the top level class in the object hierarchy and refractors EMF classes as interfaces for any class not at the top level and not a leaf node. Which is a lot like the decorator pattern. But since the term "decorator pattern" is so common it causes me to wonder if there is some subtle implementation difference with EMF that does not allow it to be said that EMF implements the decorator pattern.|
So my question is this....
Is it correct to say EMF uses the decorator pattern by default?
Powered by FUDForum
. Page generated in 0.01706 seconds