tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10039526.post110523850965903783..comments2007-04-16T14:27:43.221+10:00David Kemphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12250289605528269244noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10039526.post-1107949014742069172005-02-09T22:36:00.000+11:002005-02-09T22:36:00.000+11:00Yes, as I indicate in my follow-up entry, I have changed my mind. For many simple cases, implementation inheritance is simpler and hence preferable to composition. I still think it is a pity that, in Java, methods are virtual by default instead of final. When analysing code, I find it really helps when a comment is used to highlight when a method is simply a default implementation expected to be over-ridden by some sub-classes.David Kemphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16030549619131752898noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10039526.post-1107853372892464452005-02-08T20:02:00.000+11:002005-02-08T20:02:00.000+11:00Really a nice article on a topic which most of us overlooked most of the times. Even the "strategy Pattern" is a good solution, but then the question is which approach is the better one. If we follow the other approach then the code looks pretty simple and understandable and bit less code cluttering comparing to implementing the functionality through the Strategy Pattern". :-)parthahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08798645168445756120noreply@blogger.com