CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2009/wiki2 13 ncs: Difference between revisions
Tinydancer (talk | contribs) |
Tinydancer (talk | contribs) |
||
(34 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
=Introduction= | =Introduction= | ||
Ruby offers more concise implementations of certain design patterns than Java does. We will look at some design patterns and compare the implementation in Ruby vs Java with the goal to answer the following: | [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruby_language Ruby] offers more concise implementations of certain [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_pattern design patterns] than [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Java_language Java] does. We will look at some design patterns and compare the implementation in '''Ruby vs Java''' with the goal to answer the following: | ||
* Is this typical of dynamic object-oriented languages? | * Is this typical of dynamic object-oriented languages? | ||
* Are there design patterns that any dynamically typed language can realize better than a statically typed language? | * Are there design patterns that any [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamic_language dynamically typed language] can realize better than a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_system statically typed language]? | ||
* Are there instances when a different pattern should be used in a dynamic language than a static language? | * Are there instances when a different pattern should be used in a dynamic language than a static language? | ||
=Design Patterns in | =Design Patterns in Java vs Ruby= | ||
==Singleton Pattern== | ==Singleton Pattern== | ||
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singleton_pattern Singleton pattern] is used to restrict the instantiation of the class to | [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singleton_pattern Singleton pattern] is a design pattern used to restrict the instantiation of the class to one object. | ||
The implementation of the pattern involves: | The implementation of the pattern involves: | ||
* making the constructor private | * making the constructor private | ||
* declare a instance variable | * declare a instance variable | ||
* implement a getInstance method and make the it thread safe. | * implement a <code>getInstance</code> method and make the it thread safe. | ||
Below is the comparison between singleton class written in Java and Ruby. | |||
It is clear that Ruby provides a more concise way of implementing the singleton pattern. Ruby uses the singleton module which automatically provides all the functionality that we need to write manually in Java. By writing <code>include singleton</code> in Ruby, we prevent ourselves from having to repeat writing the same code for each class that we wish to make singleton. In contrast, we need to write the Java class below for every singleton objects we create. | |||
<code> | |||
public class SingletonExample { | '''Java''' | ||
public class SingletonExample { | |||
// declare instance variable | // declare instance variable | ||
private static SingletonExample singletonEx; | private static SingletonExample singletonEx; | ||
// Make the constructor is private | // Make the constructor is private | ||
private SingletonExample() { | private SingletonExample() { | ||
Line 36: | Line 40: | ||
} | } | ||
} | } | ||
'''Ruby''' (using singleton module) | |||
require singleton | require singleton | ||
class SingletonExample | class SingletonExample | ||
include singleton | include singleton | ||
end | end | ||
==Factory Pattern== | ==Factory Pattern== | ||
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Factory_pattern Factory pattern] is implemented by isolating the code to create an object from the concrete implementation of the class. | |||
In '''Java''', we typically write a similar code as below: | |||
interface IObjectFactory { | interface IObjectFactory { | ||
Line 73: | Line 68: | ||
} | } | ||
} | } | ||
We can | We can implement the same code skeleton in Ruby. However, there is no special classes or class methods in Ruby since it is a dynamic language. Instead, '''Ruby''' allows us to rename our factory method to be called new. | ||
class ObjectFactory | class ObjectFactory | ||
def new() | def new() | ||
Line 86: | Line 79: | ||
end | end | ||
end | end | ||
Our client class now becomes: | Our client class now becomes: | ||
class ObjectUser | class ObjectUser | ||
def doSomething(factory ) | def doSomething(factory) | ||
... | ... | ||
my_object = factory.new() | my_object = factory.new() | ||
Line 98: | Line 89: | ||
end | end | ||
end | end | ||
Ruby lets us redefine the new method and | Ruby lets us redefine the new method and allows us to implement the Factory pattern with a class that looks very much like an ordinary class. The client does not need to know about the special <code>createObject</code> method. | ||
==Iterator== | |||
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iterator_pattern Iterator pattern] is design pattern used to access the elements of an aggregate object sequentially without exposing its underlying representation. | |||
In order to use Iterator pattern, we need: | |||
* An iterator declared and initialized to point to the collection | * An iterator declared and initialized to point to the collection | ||
* Write a loop and use the iterator to get the value of the next sequential | * Write a loop and use the iterator to get the value of the next sequential object in the collection. | ||
In Java, we will need to know the type of objects in the collection and cast them to the right type in order to use them. Whereas in Ruby, iterators are built right in. | |||
Here are some examples that show the ease with which we can use iterators in Ruby: | |||
* Iterates a block of code for each element in the <code>Array</code> | |||
a = [ 10, 20, 30, 40 ] | a = [ 10, 20, 30, 40 ] | ||
a.each { |element| print "The element is #{element}\n" } | a.each { |element| print "The element is #{element}\n" } | ||
* Iterates code for every line in a file | |||
Thread.list.each { |t| print "Thread: #{t}\n" } | Thread.list.each { |t| print "Thread: #{t}\n" } | ||
* Iterates code for all active threads | |||
ObjectSpace.each_object { |o| print "Object: #{o}\n" } | ObjectSpace.each_object { |o| print "Object: #{o}\n" } | ||
* Iterates code for each object in the system | |||
open("data.txt").each_line { |line| print "The line is #{line}\n" } | open("data.txt").each_line { |line| print "The line is #{line}\n" } | ||
</code> | =Conclusion= | ||
Design pattern is a concept that applicable to solve problems regardless of the languages we use to implement the solution. So I cannot think of a case where a specific pattern will be more useful or pertinent to be used in a dynamic language than a static language. However given the features of dynamic languages like Ruby that support meta-programming and reflection via Modules and Mixins and support extending/reopening classes and redefining methods at run time definitely make it easier to implement patterns with fewer lines of code. Ruby lets us hide the details of implementations of design patterns much more effectively. You can make a class a singleton with a simple <code>include Singleton</code> statement. You can make factories that look exactly like ordinary classes. These features in Ruby do make implementing design patterns very easy and let a programmer focus on solving the problem at hand rather than spending time implementing the design patterns. | |||
= | =References= | ||
* Gamma, Erich; Richard Helm, Ralph Johnson, and John Vlissides (1995). [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_patterns_book ''Design Patterns: Elements of Reusable Object-Oriented Software'']. Addison-Wesley. ISBN 0-201-63361-2. | |||
* [http://p-cos.net/documents/dynatype.pdf Dynamic vs Static Typing -- A Pattern-based Analysis] by Pascal Costanza, March 13, 2004. | |||
* Olsen, Russ (2007). [http://www.amazon.com/Design-Patterns-Ruby-Russ-Olsen/dp/0321490452 ''Design Patterns in Ruby'']. Addison-Wesley. ISBN 0-321-49045-2. |
Latest revision as of 21:08, 15 October 2009
Introduction
Ruby offers more concise implementations of certain design patterns than Java does. We will look at some design patterns and compare the implementation in Ruby vs Java with the goal to answer the following:
- Is this typical of dynamic object-oriented languages?
- Are there design patterns that any dynamically typed language can realize better than a statically typed language?
- Are there instances when a different pattern should be used in a dynamic language than a static language?
Design Patterns in Java vs Ruby
Singleton Pattern
Singleton pattern is a design pattern used to restrict the instantiation of the class to one object.
The implementation of the pattern involves:
- making the constructor private
- declare a instance variable
- implement a
getInstance
method and make the it thread safe.
Below is the comparison between singleton class written in Java and Ruby.
It is clear that Ruby provides a more concise way of implementing the singleton pattern. Ruby uses the singleton module which automatically provides all the functionality that we need to write manually in Java. By writing include singleton
in Ruby, we prevent ourselves from having to repeat writing the same code for each class that we wish to make singleton. In contrast, we need to write the Java class below for every singleton objects we create.
Java
public class SingletonExample { // declare instance variable private static SingletonExample singletonEx; // Make the constructor is private private SingletonExample() { } // make this thread safe use synchronize synchronize public static SingletonExample getSingletonObject() { if (singletonEx == null) { singletonEx = new SingletonExample(); } return singletonEx; } }
Ruby (using singleton module)
require singleton class SingletonExample include singleton end
Factory Pattern
Factory pattern is implemented by isolating the code to create an object from the concrete implementation of the class.
In Java, we typically write a similar code as below:
interface IObjectFactory { IGear createObject(); } class ConcreteObjectFactory implements IObjectFactory{ IObject createObject() { if ( some condition ) return new XObject(); else return new YObject(); } class ObjectUser { public void doSomething(IObjectFactory factory ) { IObject my_Object = factory.createObject(); } }
We can implement the same code skeleton in Ruby. However, there is no special classes or class methods in Ruby since it is a dynamic language. Instead, Ruby allows us to rename our factory method to be called new.
class ObjectFactory def new() if ( ... some condition ) return XObject.new() else return YObject().new() end end
Our client class now becomes:
class ObjectUser def doSomething(factory) ... my_object = factory.new() ... end end
Ruby lets us redefine the new method and allows us to implement the Factory pattern with a class that looks very much like an ordinary class. The client does not need to know about the special createObject
method.
Iterator
Iterator pattern is design pattern used to access the elements of an aggregate object sequentially without exposing its underlying representation.
In order to use Iterator pattern, we need:
- An iterator declared and initialized to point to the collection
- Write a loop and use the iterator to get the value of the next sequential object in the collection.
In Java, we will need to know the type of objects in the collection and cast them to the right type in order to use them. Whereas in Ruby, iterators are built right in.
Here are some examples that show the ease with which we can use iterators in Ruby:
- Iterates a block of code for each element in the
Array
a = [ 10, 20, 30, 40 ] a.each { |element| print "The element is #{element}\n" }
- Iterates code for every line in a file
Thread.list.each { |t| print "Thread: #{t}\n" }
- Iterates code for all active threads
ObjectSpace.each_object { |o| print "Object: #{o}\n" }
- Iterates code for each object in the system
open("data.txt").each_line { |line| print "The line is #{line}\n" }
Conclusion
Design pattern is a concept that applicable to solve problems regardless of the languages we use to implement the solution. So I cannot think of a case where a specific pattern will be more useful or pertinent to be used in a dynamic language than a static language. However given the features of dynamic languages like Ruby that support meta-programming and reflection via Modules and Mixins and support extending/reopening classes and redefining methods at run time definitely make it easier to implement patterns with fewer lines of code. Ruby lets us hide the details of implementations of design patterns much more effectively. You can make a class a singleton with a simple include Singleton
statement. You can make factories that look exactly like ordinary classes. These features in Ruby do make implementing design patterns very easy and let a programmer focus on solving the problem at hand rather than spending time implementing the design patterns.
References
- Gamma, Erich; Richard Helm, Ralph Johnson, and John Vlissides (1995). Design Patterns: Elements of Reusable Object-Oriented Software. Addison-Wesley. ISBN 0-201-63361-2.
- Dynamic vs Static Typing -- A Pattern-based Analysis by Pascal Costanza, March 13, 2004.
- Olsen, Russ (2007). Design Patterns in Ruby. Addison-Wesley. ISBN 0-321-49045-2.