Timeline for Rewrite 2 repeating With-blocks
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 26, 2012 at 7:00 | vote | accept | Jonas | ||
| Mar 26, 2012 at 6:34 | comment | added | Jonas | In this case we are unable to make any changes to both the class being mapped from, as the class being mapped to. But special thanks for mentioning option 2, since I hadn't thought of that yet, and I'm sure I'll be able to use that solution again in the future. | |
| Mar 25, 2012 at 18:55 | comment | added | jmoreno | @GeorgeMauer: coincidence or integration layer, I wouldn't say that a common interface was a mistake, possibly not possible in the case of an integration layer where you don't have total control over all of the code, but not a mistake. | |
| Mar 24, 2012 at 16:47 | comment | added | Randy | Thanks George. I think your point is well taken. Since the example was showing that on the surface person1 and person2 were identical, it seemed that the primary source code was designed incorrectly. Even if this example was integrating two different sources, it seems that something should be done upstream. | |
| Mar 24, 2012 at 15:55 | comment | added | George Mauer | +1 but I want to make the point that (1) is not necessarily the best option. The similarity in property names could be a coincidence or (as I suspect might be happening here) this could be an integration layer between bounded contexts. In that case, changing the codebase would definitely be a mistake. | |
| Mar 24, 2012 at 14:01 | history | edited | Randy | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Cleaned up for easier reading of the solution
|
| Mar 23, 2012 at 17:04 | history | answered | Randy | CC BY-SA 3.0 |