Data, context and interaction: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 08:26, 13 April 2021

Revision as of 08:29, 13 April 2021

Line 86:

* True object-oriented programming languages like [[Self (programming language)|Self]] attempt to break down the dichotomy between the domains of classful programming and objectful execution, which helps programmers focus on run-time objects. DCI restores the code-level knowledge about the relationships between them in Contexts and in the static relationships between Role methods.{{citation needed|date=February 2016}}

* [[Dependency injection]] is a longstanding approach to change the functionality of an object at run time by allowing it to "outsource" some of its execution to an external object that can be re-bound at will. Most implementations{{which|date=October 2014}} of dependency injection lead to the [[Schizophrenia (object-oriented programming)|self schizophrenia]] problem,{{citation needed|date=October 2014}} which implementations of DCI address properly. Systems such as Elmo use this approach, which brings additional complexity to resolve method ambiguity and duplicate data member names.<ref>James Leigh, Elmo User Guide, http://www.openrdf.org/doc/elmo/1.5/user-guide.html {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110721134455/http://www.openrdf.org/doc/elmo/1.5/user-guide.html |date=2011-07-21 }}</ref>{{Full citation needed|date=October 2014}}

* Multi-paradigm design<ref>James Coplien, Multi-paradigm design for C++. Addison-Wesley, 1998.</ref> attemptedattempts to separate behavior and structure by according the behavior to a procedural design and the structural component to objects, allowing free access between them, in accord with the design principles of C++. However,The multi-paradigmDCI designapproach doescan aimprove poor job ofon expressing the relationship between the procedural and structural parts of design, and in general cannot realize the cohesiveness of the DCI approach.{{citation needed|date=August 2012}}

* [[Aspect-oriented programming]] (AOP) is perhaps the closest historic relative to DCI. However, most use of Aspects is closely tied to the programmer perspective rather than to the end user mental model of [[use cases]]. Further, without strong tool support, Aspects usually make code less readable from the perspective of understanding what actually goes on at a given [[pointcut]]. The main difference is that in DCI, the structure of the algorithm is primary, and its interaction with code outside of itself is viewed as secondary and minimal. Furthermore, such interaction honors the encapsulation of the code with which it interacts. In AOP, the [[pointcut]] and [[Advice in aspect-oriented programming|advice]] carry equal importance and though physically disjoint, must be understood together to understand the code, because the advice is invasive at the [[pointcut]]. While AOP provides an administrative grouping of a related collection of individual local modifications that together cross-cut the primary structure of the code, DCI is a semantic expression of an algorithm with first-class analysis standing that invokes existing object methods. DCI cann be thought of as a way of taking a large [[Advice in aspect-oriented programming|advice]] and allowing parts of it to be injected into a number of regularized [[pointcut]]s.{{citation needed|date=February 2016}}

* [[Role-oriented programming]] brings together ideas from [[Aspect-oriented programming]], conceptual modeling <ref>Friedrich Steimann, On the representation of roles in object-oriented and conceptual modelling, 2000, http://www.fernuni-hagen.de/ps/veroeffentlichungen/zeitschrift_46129.shtml</ref> and more. Early attempts (1991) defined roles in an independent fashion,<ref>Joel Richardson and Peter Schwarz, Aspects: extending objects to support multiple, independent roles, 1991, http://www.informatik.uni-trier.de/~ley/db/conf/sigmod/RichardsonS91.html {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071017185308/http://www.informatik.uni-trier.de/~ley/db/conf/sigmod/RichardsonS91.html |date=2007-10-17 }}</ref> but more recent approaches (2002 and onward) converge in emphasizing that roles depend on context (also "teams" <ref>Stephan Herrmann, Object Teams: Improving Modularity for Crosscutting Collaborations, http://www.objectteams.org/publications/index.html#NODe02, 2002</ref> or "institutions" <ref>Guido Baldoni et al., Roles as a coordination construct: introducing powerJava, 2005, http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.77.6337</ref>). In role-oriented programming, roles are defined with respect to some intrinsic (or base) entity, which corresponds to the data-role dichotomy in DCI. The concept of context is essentially the same in both approaches. Both approaches emphasize the interaction among a group of roles.