Talk:Java Programming/Design Patterns

Merge request
Post regarding the merge done and proposed is on the source page Talk:Computer Science Design Patterns. --Panic (discuss • contribs) 08:02, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Con
--VulcanWikiEdit (discuss • contribs) 10:57, 1 March 2011 (UTC) the point of design patterns is that they are independent of implementation. Merging is therefore a bad idea. And yes there are examples in various languages in the text, but they are to illustrate the patterns. Linking the pages, and moving the language specific examples over to the Java Programming/Design Patterns book is a good idea in keeping with the principles of hypertext. That I would vote for .. but not a merge as proposed.


 * I was not proposing a final merge (to what you object). I'm only making use of the merge proceedings as to make the process move along and make people aware as to prevent part of the content and the edit history from being lost (please see the post I indicated on the source talk page). That was the reason I kept that part there in the first place, to preserve the data. --Panic (discuss • contribs) 00:07, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I posted on the main discussion mentioned above. I am of similar opinion to VulcanWikiEdit, but I would go as far a saying design pattern examples are an exception to the general rule of where to place example code. For this subject, grouping them together under the specific pattern name is logically correct and increases their usefulness. Then, to avoid duplication add a single link to Computer Science Design Patterns from each language. - Rfrankla (discuss • contribs) 13:02, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
 * I agree that the examples should not be duplicated and be accessible over links from the respective language. A general merger with Java Programming is not meant and not appropriate. Concerning the description of more high-level concepts, like behavioural patterns, there may be a more general article in Wikipedia, linking to a "Main" article in WikiBooks that explain it for software-experienced readers.--Sae1962 (discuss • contribs) 08:07, 14 July 2014 (UTC)


 * I'm removing the proposal as it was initiated in 2011 and it makes no sense to pursue the issue in the situation the content is today if anyone else wished to propose a merge (as I think I read in the last posts please restate the intention in a separate thread and retag the pages). I also noted that the previous tags were in conflict in regards to indication of the source project, probably my fault at the time...  --Panic (discuss • contribs) 21:31, 16 July 2014 (UTC)