Formal Definitions of S.O.L.I.D. principles

[nknauber]

Hi,

in the exam from WS 15/16 there was one true/false question that we had trouble answering:

One of the S.O.L.I.D principles is formally defined.

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."

Could you please state your interpretation of this question? Thanks in advance
Nicolas

[eichberg]

You are correct, the LSP has a "somehow" formal definition. However, if you start digging deeper, the definition of behavioral substitutability also has some very rough corners.

[AizazZaidee]

so the answer can be both Yes and No, I suppose

[eichberg]

Yes - it depends on your arguement