To be fair I don't think that's the fault of the book or its authors - but the fault of some peoples reading of the book.Possibly, but their insistence on OO only solutions, even in C++ where others are available, didn't help. It's been a while since I read the book, but I don't remember them presenting multiple implementations for each pattern. They definitely didn't say, "Here's how you do it with objects and here's how you do it without."
Don't take any of that to mean I don't respect their book. I learned a lot from it. In particular the problems they are trying to solve, and their descriptions of them, have greatly improved my skill in medium to large scale design. I just reject their school of thought when it insists on OO only and their followers when they insist that any implementation of a solution to one of the GoF problems must mimic the one in the book. Which leads back to your point about the people reading the book, who certainly must shoulder a lot of blame.
Phil
In reply to Re^3: MJD's "Design Patterns Aren't"
by philcrow
in thread MJD's "Design Patterns Aren't"
by Scott7477
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |