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

Moderatoren: pmueller, SE - Design and Construction

nknauber
Erstie
Erstie
Beiträge: 11
Registriert: 25. Apr 2018 16:48

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

Beitrag von nknauber » 11. Jul 2018 11:44

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
Moderator
Moderator
Beiträge: 448
Registriert: 25. Sep 2007 12:12
Kontaktdaten:

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

Beitrag von eichberg » 11. Jul 2018 12:53

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.

Benutzeravatar
AizazZaidee
BASIC-Programmierer
BASIC-Programmierer
Beiträge: 106
Registriert: 20. Apr 2016 22:49

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

Beitrag von AizazZaidee » 11. Jul 2018 13:28

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

eichberg
Moderator
Moderator
Beiträge: 448
Registriert: 25. Sep 2007 12:12
Kontaktdaten:

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

Beitrag von eichberg » 11. Jul 2018 17:55

Yes - it depends on your arguement

Antworten

Zurück zu „Software Engineering - Design and Construction“