in the exam from WS 15/16 there was one true/false question that we had trouble answering:
We argued in both directions here. One argument would be, that for the Liskov Substitution Principle, there is actually a formal definition out there, see https://dzone.com/articles/solid-design ... skov-subst . But on the other hand, we argued, that "design principles are always subject to interpretation and cannot be formally defined. They all suggest certain definitions but cannot be formally defined."One of the S.O.L.I.D principles is formally defined.
Could you please state your interpretation of this question? Thanks in advance