Deleting INodeBehavior about nbitcoin HOT 6 CLOSED

It is not redundant, IMO. The abstract class ClassName : IInterface is a very convenient pattern that gives you the flexibility to change your code with less pain. It also allows you to create your own INodeBehavior implementation directly without using the abstract class, if you want/need to.

from nbitcoin.

Even though I don't use it in my code, the main problem is that changing that now can break lots of code for not a lot of upside.
Looking back I would probably not have used an interface as it makes things more complicated to change in the future, but well... at least we can have any class be a behavior as lontivero said.

My decision back then to be an interface was that the contract was very simple: Attach and Detach.

from nbitcoin.

OK, we can maintain INodeBehavior if we want -it does not hinder-, but this question appeared for me thinking of 'NodeBehaviorsCollection'.
If NodeBehaviorsCollection is a collection of NodeBehaviors... I think it has nothing to do to do with INodeBehavior, which is for "another uses we want/need" as lontivero says.
So, in my humble opinion, a collection of NodeBehaviors must have exactly NodeBehaviors and must exactly inherits a ThreadSafeCollection of NodeBehavior, not a ThreadSafeCollection of INodeBehavior, which may have little -or somewhat stranges- relationships with NodeBehaviorsCollection in a future.
I suggest making at least this little change in NodeBehaviorsCollection. I think this will make the code more accurate.

from nbitcoin.

Peleando!!

El 1 may 2016, a las 7:09, Carlos J. Díez [email protected] escribió:

OK, we can maintain INodeBehavior if we want -it does not hinder-, but this question appeared for me thinking of 'NodeBehaviorsCollection'.
If NodeBehaviorsCollection is a collection of Nodes... I think it has nothing to do to do with INodeBehavior, which is for "another uses we want/need" as lontivero says.
So, in my humble opinion, a collection of Nodes must have exactly Nodes and must exactly inherits a ThreadSafeCollection of NodeBehavior, not a ThreadSafeCollection of INodeBehavior, which may have little -or somewhat stranges- relationships with NodeBehaviorsCollection in a future.
I suggest making at least this little change in NodeBehaviorsCollection. I think this will make the code more accurate.

—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub

from nbitcoin.

We can't make a NodeBehaviorsCollection a collection of NodeBehavior without breaking lots of existing code for little upside. I don't think it is worth changing it for only easthetic reasons. Especially that users never deal directly deal with the interface and always ends up using Find<TBehavior>.

I don't think changing to collection of NodeBehavior will make their life easier, and at worse may break some of their code.

from nbitcoin.

Thanks Nicolas. I understand and agree.

from nbitcoin.