Timeline for Is there any redundancy within the scope of SOLID principles?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
11 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 17, 2023 at 13:08 | comment | added | ﾤ ﾡ | >I don't need to demonstrate anything to you To begin with, you simply can't. > I know what I'm taking about Obviously, you don't. You can't even provide a very basic thing: the definitions from the "terminology" you refer to. > You, on the other hand, came here making a claim, but are unwilling to clarify your position I made it very clear from the beginning. You, DIP groupies, have been talking nonsense for years and are unwilling to accept this. Your failure to provide a clear definition of your terminology is a striking evidence of that nonsense. | |
| Aug 17, 2023 at 12:42 | comment | added | Filip Milovanović | @ﾤﾡ - I don't need to demonstrate anything to you, nor was I trying to. I know what I'm taking about. You, on the other hand, came here making a claim, but are unwilling to clarify your position (which seems to be half-baked, to say it politely), so why would anyone take anything you say seriously? We're done here. | |
| Aug 17, 2023 at 7:05 | comment | added | ﾤ ﾡ | This is hilarious. You are unable to demonstrate neither direction, not its inversion. Instead, you are trying to appeal to "DI terminology" while this "terminology" is nonsense in the first place. Terminology, you say? Provide a clear, formal definitions of the concepts "direction" and "inversion". | |
| Apr 4, 2022 at 9:49 | comment | added | Filip Milovanović | @ﾤﾡ So, what's the problem then? I'm not questioning the straightforward meaning of the word "direction", I'm asking what is it that you think it specifically refers to within the context of DI terminology, and how this leads to your assertion that DIP has nothing to do with the direction of dependencies. Cause, again, you are simply wrong. Nevertheless, I want to hear you out. You say you don't like DI as a name - what name do you prefer? | |
| Apr 4, 2022 at 8:16 | comment | added | ﾤ ﾡ | perhaps we don't mean the same thing by "direction" This is hilarious. The word "direction" has a very clear definition, just as "inversion". Try any explanatory dictionary if you have problems understanding it. As usual, the proponents of the nonsense title introduced by Martin are trying to evade its nonsensical essence by "we have our own meaning for words". | |
| Apr 4, 2022 at 6:43 | comment | added | Filip Milovanović | @ﾤﾡ - well, you're wrong (dependency direction is fundamental to it, it's not called "inversion principle" for nothing), but please do elaborate - perhaps we don't mean the same thing by "direction" | |
| Apr 4, 2022 at 5:16 | comment | added | ﾤ ﾡ | DIP tells you how to control the direction of dependencies It has nothing to do with the direction. This nonsense is repeated over and over again. | |
| Mar 6, 2022 at 20:47 | vote | accept | bridgemnc | ||
| Mar 5, 2022 at 14:37 | history | edited | Filip Milovanović | CC BY-SA 4.0 | added 591 characters in body |
| Mar 5, 2022 at 14:18 | history | edited | Filip Milovanović | CC BY-SA 4.0 | expanded for clarity |
| Mar 5, 2022 at 1:15 | history | answered | Filip Milovanović | CC BY-SA 4.0 |