Den 2. nov. 2022 kl. 08.49 skrev Andreas Söderlund <gaz...@gmail.com>:
I'm considering an Account that is slightly more sophisticated than one with a number that can be increased/decreased. Closer to reality, this Account comprises a set of Ledgers that are added to when the balance changes, and the balance itself is not a number but the sum of those Ledgers.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "object-composition" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to object-composit...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/object-composition/d110102e-b279-4c18-a75b-c0d1cb6ba424n%40googlegroups.com.
On 2 Nov 2022, at 14.34, Lund Soltoft <lunds...@gmail.com> wrote:If I play a game of D&D with my friends, does that game exist and is it different from the game of D&D I’ll play with my brother in law and his wife tomorrow?
I'm considering an Account that is slightly more sophisticated than one with a number that can be increased/decreased. Closer to reality, this Account comprises a set of Ledgers that are added to when the balance changes, and the balance itself is not a number but the sum of those Ledgers.
On 2 Nov 2022, at 14.34, Lund Soltoft <lunds...@gmail.com> wrote:If I play a game of D&D with my friends, does that game exist and is it different from the game of D&D I’ll play with my brother in law and his wife tomorrow?This is qualitatively different from what Andreas is asking, because your example is a new game every time, whereas the account example is a continuous set of data across time. Forgetting all data is O.K. in your case but not in his.
A game of D&D goes on forever and each (trans)action of the players is added to the previous. It’s the accumulated effect of all these (trans)actions that describes the current state. So I beg to differ 😊. However that was not my point. My point was that the a) that we can talk about individual games because they do have an identity and that Id of each of these games are not based on the role players.
I'm considering an Account that is slightly more sophisticated than one with a number that can be increased/decreased. Closer to reality, this Account comprises a set of Ledgers that are added to when the balance changes, and the balance itself is not a number but the sum of those Ledgers.My mental model is that there is an Account instantiation that represents the state of the transaction log (the “real account”) rather than being the transaction log. It is a temporary proxy, and such proxies come and go. From the perspective of banking system architecture the class is misnamed: it better should be named “business-level transaction."
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "object-composition" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to object-composit...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/object-composition/F50C0360-C3DA-46EB-AACD-3FC2C5C8087A%40gmail.com.
On 6 Nov 2022, at 15.08, Lund Soltoft <lunds...@gmail.com> wrote:A game of D&D goes on forever and each (trans)action of the players is added to the previous. It’s the accumulated effect of all these (trans)actions that describes the current state. So I beg to differ 😊. However that was not my point. My point was that the a) that we can talk about individual games because they do have an identity and that Id of each of these games are not based on the role players.
On 6 Nov 2022, at 15.08, Lund Soltoft <lunds...@gmail.com> wrote:A game of D&D goes on forever and each (trans)action of the players is added to the previous. It’s the accumulated effect of all these (trans)actions that describes the current state. So I beg to differ 😊. However that was not my point. My point was that the a) that we can talk about individual games because they do have an identity and that Id of each of these games are not based on the role players.
O.K., thanks for the clarification.Nonetheless, and further — if that is so, then there is only one game (locus of state), and the presence of intervening time does not change role/actor bindings of the game proper.
You may have individual sessions. If there are some per-session artefacts, each one is just a proxy for the game — just like an “Account object” is a proxy for the transaction logs and audit trails.The proxy must provide the illusion of preserving identity, but in the real game, there must be a level at which identity is really preserved.Having a Tardis would cause your setup to violate identity. You avoid this only by eliminating proxies.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "object-composition" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to object-composit...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/object-composition/7165F387-5284-4124-ABFF-6F8859E3F2CA%40gmail.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/object-composition/6AA5F98E-E949-4FA3-B13A-E651552772BF%40gmail.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/object-composition/C5F2F093-06AA-400E-81B6-EF0731D39C99%40gmail.com.
On 9 Nov 2022, at 11.54, Matthew Browne <mbro...@gmail.com> wrote:This question also reminds me of earlier discussions about whether we really need classes anymore, and what exactly is the distinction between a class and a context. If I were creating a brand new language, my current thinking (inspired by Rune) is that I wouldn't include classes at all because Contexts can do everything classes can do except for inheritance, and the goals of inheritance can be achieved via other means. So I would broaden the definition of a Context to include what we would traditionally think of as classes - templates for creating objects that don't necessarily even contain any roles.