Re: Software Architecture/Design

----- "Morten Brodersen" <[email protected]> a écrit :

> A message based architecture is actually very different from the
> SO/PO approach.
> 
> The SO/PO focuses on state less PO's transforming one or more SO's to
> one or more SO's.
> 
> The PO's are called directly in the code. There are no
> intermediate/mediator forwarding messages from one PO to another.
> 
> Messaging can be added to a SO/PO architecture but it is not at all
> required.
> 
> Given that a message is a SO and a network is an SO you could for
> example describe messaging this way:
> 
> SomeState -> [SomeStateToNetworkMsg] -> NetworkMsg
> Socket+NetworkMsg -> [NetworkMsgSender] -> Socket
> Socket -> [NetworkMsgReceiver] -> Socket+NetworkMsg
> NetworkMsg -> [NetworkMsg2SomeState] -> SomeState
> 
> Again breaking the architecture into simple State and Process Objects
> that can be mixed and matched with other SO's. For example with the
> following:
> 
> Console+NetworkMsg -> [NetworkMsgPrinter] -> Console
> NetworkLog+NetworkMsg -> [NetworkMsgLogger] -> NetworkLog
> NetworkLog -> [NetworkLogSaver] -> NetworkLogFile
> etc.
> 
> Morten

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but this doesn't this approach limit the flexibility of the system ? I mean, if behaviors are called explicitely, then adding a behavior need changes in other place of the code (meaning in turn that beyond some limit, the code will be awfully difficult to maintain). 

It also seems difficult to me to build a data-driven approach on the top of this appraoch (but again, I might be wrong). 

Or am I missing something obvious ?

-- Emmanuel Deloget
_______________________________________________
Sweng-Gamedev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.midnightryder.com/listinfo.cgi/sweng-gamedev-midnightryder.com