Date/time class changes to handle extended date ranges
ruurd at tiscali.nl
Mon Feb 20 11:13:29 GMT 2006
On Monday 20 February 2006 11.29, Inge Wallin wrote:
>> Again: if there is a disconnect between the implication of the name KDate
>> and its real functionality, don't call the class KDate. If the new class
>> cannot guarantee conversion without error, don't offer the conversion. It
>> confuses the people that are going to work with that class and draw a
>> couple of conclusions based on among others the Q->K convention.
> Frankly, I don't get your problem. KDate is an *extension* to QDate, i.e.
> it can do more.
If KDate would be a specialization of QDate extension of the contract breaks
the Liskov Substitution Principle. If it is not, I cannot use the class as a
dropin replacement and a disconnect exists that is not reflected in the name
> If you are using KDate in your program there is no reason to ever convert it
> to a QDate since you have KDate available. If you don't use KDate, you
> won't get the conversion problem ever.
Then what is the use of the name KDate? Or even adding a class with that name
R.F. Pels, 3e Rompert 118, 5233 AL 's-Hertogenbosch, The Netherlands
+31736414590 ruurd at tiscali.nl http://home.tiscali.nl/~ruurd
More information about the kde-core-devel