In object-oriented programming, the decorator pattern is a design pattern that allows behavior to be added to an individual object, dynamically, without affecting the behavior of other instances of the same class. [1] The decorator pattern is often useful for adhering to the Single Responsibility Principle, as it allows functionality to be divided between classes with unique areas of concern [2] as well as to the Open-Closed Principle, by allowing the functionality of a class to be extended without being modified. [3] Decorator use can be more efficient than subclassing, because an object's behavior can be augmented without defining an entirely new object.
The decorator [4] design pattern is one of the twenty-three well-known design patterns ; these describe how to solve recurring design problems and design flexible and reusable object-oriented software—that is, objects which are easier to implement, change, test, and reuse.
The decorator pattern provides a flexible alternative to subclassing for extending functionality. When using subclassing, different subclasses extend a class in different ways. However, an extension is bound to the class at compile-time and can't be changed at run-time. The decorator pattern allows responsibilities to be added (and removed from) an object dynamcally at run-time. It is achieved by defining Decorator
objects that
Component
) transparently by forwarding all requests to it.This allows working with different Decorator
objects to extend the functionality of an object dynamically at run-time. [5]
The decorator pattern can be used to extend (decorate) the functionality of a certain object statically, or in some cases at run-time, independently of other instances of the same class, provided some groundwork is done at design time. This is achieved by designing a new Decorator class that wraps the original class. This wrapping could be achieved by the following sequence of steps:
This pattern is designed so that multiple decorators can be stacked on top of each other, each time adding a new functionality to the overridden method(s).
Note that decorators and the original class object share a common set of features. In the previous diagram, the operation() method was available in both the decorated and undecorated versions.
The decoration features (e.g., methods, properties, or other members) are usually defined by an interface, mixin (a.k.a. trait) or class inheritance which is shared by the decorators and the decorated object. In the previous example, the class Component is inherited by both the ConcreteComponent and the subclasses that descend from Decorator.
The decorator pattern is an alternative to subclassing. Subclassing adds behavior at compile time, and the change affects all instances of the original class; decorating can provide new behavior at run-time for selected objects. [5]
This difference becomes most important when there are several independent ways of extending functionality. In some object-oriented programming languages, classes cannot be created at runtime, and it is typically not possible to predict, at design time, what combinations of extensions will be needed. This would mean that a new class would have to be made for every possible combination. By contrast, decorators are objects, created at runtime, and can be combined on a per-use basis. The I/O Streams implementations of both Java and the .NET Framework incorporate the decorator pattern. [5]
As an example, consider a window in a windowing system. To allow scrolling of the window's contents, one may wish to add horizontal or vertical scrollbars to it, as appropriate. Assume windows are represented by instances of the Window interface, and assume this class has no functionality for adding scrollbars. One could create a subclass ScrollingWindow that provides them, or create a ScrollingWindowDecorator that adds this functionality to existing Window objects. At this point, either solution would be fine.
Now, assume one also desires the ability to add borders to windows. Again, the original Window class has no support. The ScrollingWindow subclass now poses a problem, because it has effectively created a new kind of window. If one wishes to add border support to many but not all windows, one must create subclasses WindowWithBorder and ScrollingWindowWithBorder, etc. This problem gets worse with every new feature or window subtype to be added. For the decorator solution, a new BorderedWindowDecorator is created. Any combination of ScrollingWindowDecorator or BorderedWindowDecorator can decorate existing windows. If the functionality needs to be added to all Windows, the base class can be modified. On the other hand, sometimes (e.g., using external frameworks) it is not possible, legal, or convenient to modify the base class.
In the previous example, the SimpleWindow and WindowDecorator classes implement the Window interface, which defines the draw() method and the getDescription() method that are required in this scenario, in order to decorate a window control.
Adding or removing decorators on command (like a button press) is a common UI pattern, often implemented along with the Command design pattern. For example, a text editing application might have a button to highlight text. On button press, the individual text glyphs currently selected will all be wrapped in decorators that modify their draw() function, causing them to be drawn in a highlighted manner (a real implementation would probably also use a demarcation system to maximize efficiency).
Applying or removing decorators based on changes in state is another common use case. Depending on the scope of the state, decorators can be applied or removed in bulk. Similarly, the State design pattern can be implemented using decorators instead of subclassed objects encapsulating the changing functionality. The use of decorators in this manner makes the State object's internal state and functionality more compositional and capable of handling arbitrary complexity.
Decoration is also often used in the Flyweight design pattern. Flyweight objects are divided into two components: an invariant component that is shared between all flyweight objects; and a variant, decorated component that may be partially shared or completely unshared. This partitioning of the flyweight object is intended to reduce memory consumption. The decorators are typically cached and reused as well. The decorators will all contain a common reference to the shared, invariant object. If the decorated state is only partially variant, then the decorators can also be shared to some degree - though care must be taken not to alter their state while they're being used. iOS's UITableView implements the flyweight pattern in this manner - a tableview's reusable cells are decorators that contains a references to a common tableview row object, and the cells are cached / reused.
Applying combinations of decorators in diverse ways to a collection of objects introduces some problems interfacing with the collection in a way that takes full advantage of the functionality added by the decorators. The use of an Adapter or Visitor patterns can be useful in such cases. Interfacing with multiple layers of decorators poses additional challenges and logic of Adapters and Visitors must be designed to account for that.
Decorators support a compositional rather than a top-down, hierarchical approach to extending functionality. A decorator makes it possible to add or alter behavior of an interface at run-time. They can be used to wrap objects in a multilayered, arbitrary combination of ways. Doing the same with subclasses means implementing complex networks of multiple inheritance, which is memory-inefficient and at a certain point just cannot scale. Likewise, attempting to implement the same functionality with properties bloats each instance of the object with unnecessary properties. For the above reasons decorators are often considered a memory-efficient alternative to subclassing.
Decorators can also be used to specialize objects which are not subclassable, whose characteristics need to be altered at runtime (as mentioned elsewhere), or generally objects that are lacking in some needed functionality.
The decorator pattern also can augment the Facade pattern. A facade is designed to simply interface with the complex system it encapsulates, but it does not add functionality to the system. However, the wrapping of a complex system provides a space that may be used to introduce new functionality based on the coordination of subcomponents in the system. For example, a facade pattern may unify many different languages dictionaries under one multi-language dictionary interface. The new interface may also provide new functions for translating words between languages. This is a hybrid pattern - the unified interface provides a space for augmentation. Think of decorators as not being limited to wrapping individual objects, but capable of wrapping clusters of objects in this hybrid approach as well.
As an alternative to the decorator pattern, the adapter can be used when the wrapper must respect a particular interface and must support polymorphic behavior, and the Facade when an easier or simpler interface to an underlying object is desired. [6]
Pattern | Intent |
---|---|
Adapter | Converts one interface to another so that it matches what the client is expecting |
Decorator | Dynamically adds responsibility to the interface by wrapping the original code |
Facade | Provides a simplified interface |
In the above UML class diagram, the abstract Decorator
class maintains a reference (component
) to the decorated object (Component
) and forwards all requests to it (component.operation()
). This makes Decorator
transparent (invisible) to clients of Component
.
Subclasses (Decorator1
,Decorator2
) implement additional behavior (addBehavior()
) that should be added to the Component
(before/after forwarding a request to it).
The sequence diagram shows the run-time interactions: The Client
object works through Decorator1
and Decorator2
objects to extend the functionality of a Component1
object.
The Client
calls operation()
on Decorator1
, which forwards the request to Decorator2
. Decorator2
performs addBehavior()
after forwarding the request to Component1
and returns to Decorator1
, which performs addBehavior()
and returns to the Client
.
This implementation is based on the pre C++98 implementation in the book.
#include<iostream>#include<memory>// Beverage interface.classBeverage{public:virtualvoiddrink()=0;virtual~Beverage()=default;};// Drinks which can be decorated.classCoffee:publicBeverage{public:virtualvoiddrink()override{std::cout<<"Drinking Coffee";}};classSoda:publicBeverage{public:virtualvoiddrink()override{std::cout<<"Drinking Soda";}};classBeverageDecorator:publicBeverage{public:BeverageDecorator()=delete;BeverageDecorator(std::unique_ptr<Beverage>component_):component(std::move(component_)){}virtualvoiddrink()=0;protected:voidcallComponentDrink(){if(component){component->drink();}}private:std::unique_ptr<Beverage>component;};classMilk:publicBeverageDecorator{public:Milk(std::unique_ptr<Beverage>component_,floatpercentage_):BeverageDecorator(std::move(component_)),percentage(percentage_){}virtualvoiddrink()override{callComponentDrink();std::cout<<", with milk of richness "<<percentage<<"%";}private:floatpercentage;};classIceCubes:publicBeverageDecorator{public:IceCubes(std::unique_ptr<Beverage>component_,intcount_):BeverageDecorator(std::move(component_)),count(count_){}virtualvoiddrink()override{callComponentDrink();std::cout<<", with "<<count<<" ice cubes";}private:intcount;};classSugar:publicBeverageDecorator{public:Sugar(std::unique_ptr<Beverage>component_,intspoons_):BeverageDecorator(std::move(component_)),spoons(spoons_){}virtualvoiddrink()override{callComponentDrink();std::cout<<", with "<<spoons<<" spoons of sugar";}private:intspoons=1;};intmain(){std::unique_ptr<Beverage>soda=std::make_unique<Soda>();soda=std::make_unique<IceCubes>(std::move(soda),3);soda=std::make_unique<Sugar>(std::move(soda),1);soda->drink();std::cout<<std::endl;std::unique_ptr<Beverage>coffee=std::make_unique<Coffee>();coffee=std::make_unique<IceCubes>(std::move(coffee),16);coffee=std::make_unique<Milk>(std::move(coffee),3.);coffee=std::make_unique<Sugar>(std::move(coffee),2);coffee->drink();return0;}
The program output is like
DrinkingSoda,with3icecubes,with1spoonsofsugarDrinkingCoffee,with16icecubes,withmilkofrichness3%,with2spoonsofsugar
Full example can be tested on a godbolt page.
Two options are presented here: first, a dynamic, runtime-composable decorator (has issues with calling decorated functions unless proxied explicitly) and a decorator that uses mixin inheritance.
#include<iostream>#include<string>structShape{virtual~Shape()=default;virtualstd::stringGetName()const=0;};structCircle:Shape{voidResize(floatfactor){radius*=factor;}std::stringGetName()constoverride{returnstd::string("A circle of radius ")+std::to_string(radius);}floatradius=10.0f;};structColoredShape:Shape{ColoredShape(conststd::string&color,Shape*shape):color(color),shape(shape){}std::stringGetName()constoverride{returnshape->GetName()+" which is colored "+color;}std::stringcolor;Shape*shape;};intmain(){Circlecircle;ColoredShapecolored_shape("red",&circle);std::cout<<colored_shape.GetName()<<std::endl;}
#include<memory>#include<iostream>#include<string>structWebPage{virtualvoiddisplay()=0;virtual~WebPage()=default;};structBasicWebPage:WebPage{std::stringhtml;voiddisplay()override{std::cout<<"Basic WEB page"<<std::endl;}};structWebPageDecorator:WebPage{WebPageDecorator(std::unique_ptr<WebPage>webPage):_webPage(std::move(webPage)){}voiddisplay()override{_webPage->display();}private:std::unique_ptr<WebPage>_webPage;};structAuthenticatedWebPage:WebPageDecorator{AuthenticatedWebPage(std::unique_ptr<WebPage>webPage):WebPageDecorator(std::move(webPage)){}voidauthenticateUser(){std::cout<<"authentification done"<<std::endl;}voiddisplay()override{authenticateUser();WebPageDecorator::display();}};structAuthorizedWebPage:WebPageDecorator{AuthorizedWebPage(std::unique_ptr<WebPage>webPage):WebPageDecorator(std::move(webPage)){}voidauthorizedUser(){std::cout<<"authorized done"<<std::endl;}voiddisplay()override{authorizedUser();WebPageDecorator::display();}};intmain(intargc,char*argv[]){std::unique_ptr<WebPage>myPage=std::make_unique<BasicWebPage>();myPage=std::make_unique<AuthorizedWebPage>(std::move(myPage));myPage=std::make_unique<AuthenticatedWebPage>(std::move(myPage));myPage->display();std::cout<<std::endl;return0;}
This example demonstrates a static Decorator implementation, which is possible due to C++ ability to inherit from the template argument.
#include<iostream>#include<string>structCircle{voidResize(floatfactor){radius*=factor;}std::stringGetName()const{returnstd::string("A circle of radius ")+std::to_string(radius);}floatradius=10.0f;};template<typenameT>structColoredShape:publicT{ColoredShape(conststd::string&color):color(color){}std::stringGetName()const{returnT::GetName()+" which is colored "+color;}std::stringcolor;};intmain(){ColoredShape<Circle>red_circle("red");std::cout<<red_circle.GetName()<<std::endl;red_circle.Resize(1.5f);std::cout<<red_circle.GetName()<<std::endl;}
The following Java example illustrates the use of decorators using the window/scrolling scenario.
// The Window interface classpublicinterfaceWindow{voiddraw();// Draws the WindowStringgetDescription();// Returns a description of the Window}// Implementation of a simple Window without any scrollbarsclassSimpleWindowimplementsWindow{@Overridepublicvoiddraw(){// Draw window}@OverridepublicStringgetDescription(){return"simple window";}}
The following classes contain the decorators for all Window
classes, including the decorator classes themselves.
// abstract decorator class - note that it implements WindowabstractclassWindowDecoratorimplementsWindow{privatefinalWindowwindowToBeDecorated;// the Window being decoratedpublicWindowDecorator(WindowwindowToBeDecorated){this.windowToBeDecorated=windowToBeDecorated;}@Overridepublicvoiddraw(){windowToBeDecorated.draw();//Delegation}@OverridepublicStringgetDescription(){returnwindowToBeDecorated.getDescription();//Delegation}}// The first concrete decorator which adds vertical scrollbar functionalityclassVerticalScrollBarDecoratorextendsWindowDecorator{publicVerticalScrollBarDecorator(WindowwindowToBeDecorated){super(windowToBeDecorated);}@Overridepublicvoiddraw(){super.draw();drawVerticalScrollBar();}privatevoiddrawVerticalScrollBar(){// Draw the vertical scrollbar}@OverridepublicStringgetDescription(){returnsuper.getDescription()+", including vertical scrollbars";}}// The second concrete decorator which adds horizontal scrollbar functionalityclassHorizontalScrollBarDecoratorextendsWindowDecorator{publicHorizontalScrollBarDecorator(WindowwindowToBeDecorated){super(windowToBeDecorated);}@Overridepublicvoiddraw(){super.draw();drawHorizontalScrollBar();}privatevoiddrawHorizontalScrollBar(){// Draw the horizontal scrollbar}@OverridepublicStringgetDescription(){returnsuper.getDescription()+", including horizontal scrollbars";}}
Here's a test program that creates a Window
instance which is fully decorated (i.e., with vertical and horizontal scrollbars), and prints its description:
publicclassDecoratedWindowTest{publicstaticvoidmain(String[]args){// Create a decorated Window with horizontal and vertical scrollbarsWindowdecoratedWindow=newHorizontalScrollBarDecorator(newVerticalScrollBarDecorator(newSimpleWindow()));// Print the Window's descriptionSystem.out.println(decoratedWindow.getDescription());}}
The output of this program is "simple window, including vertical scrollbars, including horizontal scrollbars". Notice how the getDescription
method of the two decorators first retrieve the decorated Window
's description and decorates it with a suffix.
Below is the JUnit test class for the Test Driven Development
import staticorg.junit.Assert.assertEquals;importorg.junit.Test;publicclassWindowDecoratorTest{@TestpublicvoidtestWindowDecoratorTest(){WindowdecoratedWindow=newHorizontalScrollBarDecorator(newVerticalScrollBarDecorator(newSimpleWindow()));// assert that the description indeed includes horizontal + vertical scrollbarsassertEquals("simple window, including vertical scrollbars, including horizontal scrollbars",decoratedWindow.getDescription());}}
The next Java example illustrates the use of decorators using coffee making scenario. In this example, the scenario only includes cost and ingredients.
// The interface Coffee defines the functionality of Coffee implemented by decoratorpublicinterfaceCoffee{publicdoublegetCost();// Returns the cost of the coffeepublicStringgetIngredients();// Returns the ingredients of the coffee}// Extension of a simple coffee without any extra ingredientspublicclassSimpleCoffeeimplementsCoffee{@OverridepublicdoublegetCost(){return1;}@OverridepublicStringgetIngredients(){return"Coffee";}}
The following classes contain the decorators for all Coffee classes, including the decorator classes themselves.
// Abstract decorator class - note that it implements Coffee interfacepublicabstractclassCoffeeDecoratorimplementsCoffee{privatefinalCoffeedecoratedCoffee;publicCoffeeDecorator(Coffeec){this.decoratedCoffee=c;}@OverridepublicdoublegetCost(){// Implementing methods of the interfacereturndecoratedCoffee.getCost();}@OverridepublicStringgetIngredients(){returndecoratedCoffee.getIngredients();}}// Decorator WithMilk mixes milk into coffee.// Note it extends CoffeeDecorator.classWithMilkextendsCoffeeDecorator{publicWithMilk(Coffeec){super(c);}@OverridepublicdoublegetCost(){// Overriding methods defined in the abstract superclassreturnsuper.getCost()+0.5;}@OverridepublicStringgetIngredients(){returnsuper.getIngredients()+", Milk";}}// Decorator WithSprinkles mixes sprinkles onto coffee.// Note it extends CoffeeDecorator.classWithSprinklesextendsCoffeeDecorator{publicWithSprinkles(Coffeec){super(c);}@OverridepublicdoublegetCost(){returnsuper.getCost()+0.2;}@OverridepublicStringgetIngredients(){returnsuper.getIngredients()+", Sprinkles";}}
Here's a test program that creates a Coffee instance which is fully decorated (with milk and sprinkles), and calculate cost of coffee and prints its ingredients:
publicclassMain{publicstaticvoidprintInfo(Coffeec){System.out.println("Cost: "+c.getCost()+"; Ingredients: "+c.getIngredients());}publicstaticvoidmain(String[]args){Coffeec=newSimpleCoffee();printInfo(c);c=newWithMilk(c);printInfo(c);c=newWithSprinkles(c);printInfo(c);}}
The output of this program is given below:
Cost: 1.0; Ingredients: Coffee Cost: 1.5; Ingredients: Coffee, Milk Cost: 1.7; Ingredients: Coffee, Milk, Sprinkles
abstractclassComponent{protected$data;protected$value;abstractpublicfunctiongetData();abstractpublicfunctiongetValue();}classConcreteComponentextendsComponent{publicfunction__construct(){$this->value=1000;$this->data="Concrete Component:\t{$this->value}\n";}publicfunctiongetData(){return$this->data;}publicfunctiongetValue(){return$this->value;}}abstractclassDecoratorextendsComponent{}classConcreteDecorator1extendsDecorator{publicfunction__construct(Component$data){$this->value=500;$this->data=$data;}publicfunctiongetData(){return$this->data->getData()."Concrete Decorator 1:\t{$this->value}\n";}publicfunctiongetValue(){return$this->value+$this->data->getValue();}}classConcreteDecorator2extendsDecorator{publicfunction__construct(Component$data){$this->value=500;$this->data=$data;}publicfunctiongetData(){return$this->data->getData()."Concrete Decorator 2:\t{$this->value}\n";}publicfunctiongetValue(){return$this->value+$this->data->getValue();}}classClient{private$component;publicfunction__construct(){$this->component=newConcreteComponent();$this->component=$this->wrapComponent($this->component);echo$this->component->getData();echo"Client:\t\t\t";echo$this->component->getValue();}privatefunctionwrapComponent(Component$component){$component1=newConcreteDecorator1($component);$component2=newConcreteDecorator2($component1);return$component2;}}$client=newClient();// Result: #quanton81//Concrete Component: 1000//Concrete Decorator 1: 500//Concrete Decorator 2: 500//Client: 2000
The following Python example, taken from Python Wiki - DecoratorPattern, shows us how to pipeline decorators to dynamically add many behaviors in an object:
"""Demonstrated decorators in a world of a 10x10 grid of values 0-255. """importrandomdefs32_to_u16(x):ifx<0:sign=0xF000else:sign=0bottom=x&0x00007FFFreturnbottom|signdefseed_from_xy(x,y):returns32_to_u16(x)|(s32_to_u16(y)<<16)classRandomSquare:def__init__(s,seed_modifier):s.seed_modifier=seed_modifierdefget(s,x,y):seed=seed_from_xy(x,y)^s.seed_modifierrandom.seed(seed)returnrandom.randint(0,255)classDataSquare:def__init__(s,initial_value=None):s.data=[initial_value]*10*10defget(s,x,y):returns.data[(y*10)+x]# yes: these are all 10x10defset(s,x,y,u):s.data[(y*10)+x]=uclassCacheDecorator:def__init__(s,decorated):s.decorated=decorateds.cache=DataSquare()defget(s,x,y):ifs.cache.get(x,y)==None:s.cache.set(x,y,s.decorated.get(x,y))returns.cache.get(x,y)classMaxDecorator:def__init__(s,decorated,max):s.decorated=decorateds.max=maxdefget(s,x,y):ifs.decorated.get(x,y)>s.max:returns.maxreturns.decorated.get(x,y)classMinDecorator:def__init__(s,decorated,min):s.decorated=decorateds.min=mindefget(s,x,y):ifs.decorated.get(x,y)<s.min:returns.minreturns.decorated.get(x,y)classVisibilityDecorator:def__init__(s,decorated):s.decorated=decorateddefget(s,x,y):returns.decorated.get(x,y)defdraw(s):foryinrange(10):forxinrange(10):print"%3d"%s.get(x,y),print# Now, build up a pipeline of decorators:random_square=RandomSquare(635)random_cache=CacheDecorator(random_square)max_filtered=MaxDecorator(random_cache,200)min_filtered=MinDecorator(max_filtered,100)final=VisibilityDecorator(min_filtered)final.draw()
Note:
The Decorator Pattern (or an implementation of this design pattern in Python - as the above example) should not be confused with Python Decorators, a language feature of Python. They are different things.
Second to the Python Wiki:
The Decorator Pattern is a pattern described in the Design Patterns Book. It is a way of apparently modifying an object's behavior, by enclosing it inside a decorating object with a similar interface. This is not to be confused with Python Decorators, which is a language feature for dynamically modifying a function or class. [8]
abstractclassCoffeeabstractdefcostabstractdefingredientsend# Extension of a simple coffeeclassSimpleCoffee<Coffeedefcost1.0enddefingredients"Coffee"endend# Abstract decoratorclassCoffeeDecorator<Coffeeprotectedgetterdecorated_coffee:Coffeedefinitialize(@decorated_coffee)enddefcostdecorated_coffee.costenddefingredientsdecorated_coffee.ingredientsendendclassWithMilk<CoffeeDecoratordefcostsuper+0.5enddefingredientssuper+", Milk"endendclassWithSprinkles<CoffeeDecoratordefcostsuper+0.2enddefingredientssuper+", Sprinkles"endendclassProgramdefprint(coffee:Coffee)puts"Cost: #{coffee.cost}; Ingredients: #{coffee.ingredients}"enddefinitializecoffee=SimpleCoffee.newprint(coffee)coffee=WithMilk.new(coffee)print(coffee)coffee=WithSprinkles.new(coffee)print(coffee)endendProgram.new
Output:
Cost: 1.0; Ingredients: Coffee Cost: 1.5; Ingredients: Coffee, Milk Cost: 1.7; Ingredients: Coffee, Milk, Sprinkles
namespaceWikiDesignPatterns;publicinterfaceIBike{stringGetDetails();doubleGetPrice();}publicclassAluminiumBike:IBike{publicdoubleGetPrice()=>100.0;publicstringGetDetails()=>"Aluminium Bike";}publicclassCarbonBike:IBike{publicdoubleGetPrice()=>1000.0;publicstringGetDetails()=>"Carbon";}publicabstractclassBikeAccessories:IBike{privatereadonlyIBike_bike;publicBikeAccessories(IBikebike){_bike=bike;}publicvirtualdoubleGetPrice()=>_bike.GetPrice();publicvirtualstringGetDetails()=>_bike.GetDetails();}publicclassSecurityPackage:BikeAccessories{publicSecurityPackage(IBikebike):base(bike){}publicoverridestringGetDetails()=>base.GetDetails()+" + Security Package";publicoverridedoubleGetPrice()=>base.GetPrice()+1;}publicclassSportPackage:BikeAccessories{publicSportPackage(IBikebike):base(bike){}publicoverridestringGetDetails()=>base.GetDetails()+" + Sport Package";publicoverridedoubleGetPrice()=>base.GetPrice()+10;}publicclassBikeShop{publicstaticvoidUpgradeBike(){varbasicBike=newAluminiumBike();BikeAccessoriesupgraded=newSportPackage(basicBike);upgraded=newSecurityPackage(upgraded);Console.WriteLine($"Bike: '{upgraded.GetDetails()}' Cost: {upgraded.GetPrice()}");}}
Output:
Bike: 'Aluminium Bike + Sport Package + Security Package' Cost: 111
classAbstractCoffeedefprintputs"Cost: #{cost}; Ingredients: #{ingredients}"endendclassSimpleCoffee<AbstractCoffeedefcost1.0enddefingredients"Coffee"endendclassWithMilk<SimpleDelegatordefcost__getobj__.cost+0.5enddefingredients__getobj__.ingredients+", Milk"endendclassWithSprinkles<SimpleDelegatordefcost__getobj__.cost+0.2enddefingredients__getobj__.ingredients+", Sprinkles"endendcoffee=SimpleCoffee.newcoffee.printcoffee=WithMilk.new(coffee)coffee.printcoffee=WithSprinkles.new(coffee)coffee.print
Output:
Cost: 1.0; Ingredients: Coffee Cost: 1.5; Ingredients: Coffee, Milk Cost: 1.7; Ingredients: Coffee, Milk, Sprinkles
A visitor pattern is a software design pattern that separates the algorithm from the object structure. Because of this separation, new operations can be added to existing object structures without modifying the structures. It is one way to follow the open/closed principle in object-oriented programming and software engineering.
In software engineering, the adapter pattern is a software design pattern that allows the interface of an existing class to be used as another interface. It is often used to make existing classes work with others without modifying their source code.
The bridge pattern is a design pattern used in software engineering that is meant to "decouple an abstraction from its implementation so that the two can vary independently", introduced by the Gang of Four. The bridge uses encapsulation, aggregation, and can use inheritance to separate responsibilities into different classes.
In computer programming, lazy initialization is the tactic of delaying the creation of an object, the calculation of a value, or some other expensive process until the first time it is needed. It is a kind of lazy evaluation that refers specifically to the instantiation of objects or other resources.
In computer programming, the flyweight software design pattern refers to an object that minimizes memory usage by sharing some of its data with other similar objects. The flyweight pattern is one of twenty-three well-known GoF design patterns. These patterns promote flexible object-oriented software design, which is easier to implement, change, test, and reuse.
In object-oriented programming, the factory method pattern is a design pattern that uses factory methods to deal with the problem of creating objects without having to specify their exact classes. Rather than by calling a constructor, this is accomplished by invoking a factory method to create an object. Factory methods can be specified in an interface and implemented by subclasses or implemented in a base class and optionally overridden by subclasses. It is one of the 23 classic design patterns described in the book Design Patterns and is subcategorized as a creational pattern.
In software engineering, the composite pattern is a partitioning design pattern. The composite pattern describes a group of objects that are treated the same way as a single instance of the same type of object. The intent of a composite is to "compose" objects into tree structures to represent part-whole hierarchies. Implementing the composite pattern lets clients treat individual objects and compositions uniformly.
In software design and engineering, the observer pattern is a software design pattern in which an object, named the subject, maintains a list of its dependents, called observers, and notifies them automatically of any state changes, usually by calling one of their methods.
A method in object-oriented programming (OOP) is a procedure associated with an object, and generally also a message. An object consists of state data and behavior; these compose an interface, which specifies how the object may be used. A method is a behavior of an object parametrized by a user.
In object-oriented programming such as is often used in C++ and Object Pascal, a virtual function or virtual method is an inheritable and overridable function or method that is dispatched dynamically. Virtual functions are an important part of (runtime) polymorphism in object-oriented programming (OOP). They allow for the execution of target functions that were not precisely identified at compile time.
In computer programming, a function object is a construct allowing an object to be invoked or called as if it were an ordinary function, usually with the same syntax. In some languages, particularly C++, function objects are often called functors.
Method overriding, in object-oriented programming, is a language feature that allows a subclass or child class to provide a specific implementation of a method that is already provided by one of its superclasses or parent classes. In addition to providing data-driven algorithm-determined parameters across virtual network interfaces, it also allows for a specific type of polymorphism (subtyping). The implementation in the subclass overrides (replaces) the implementation in the superclass by providing a method that has same name, same parameters or signature, and same return type as the method in the parent class. The version of a method that is executed will be determined by the object that is used to invoke it. If an object of a parent class is used to invoke the method, then the version in the parent class will be executed, but if an object of the subclass is used to invoke the method, then the version in the child class will be executed. This helps in preventing problems associated with differential relay analytics which would otherwise rely on a framework in which method overriding might be obviated. Some languages allow a programmer to prevent a method from being overridden.
Modern C++ Design: Generic Programming and Design Patterns Applied is a book written by Andrei Alexandrescu, published in 2001 by Addison-Wesley. It has been regarded as "one of the most important C++ books" by Scott Meyers.
Scala is a strong statically typed high-level general-purpose programming language that supports both object-oriented programming and functional programming. Designed to be concise, many of Scala's design decisions are intended to address criticisms of Java.
The curiously recurring template pattern (CRTP) is an idiom, originally in C++, in which a class X
derives from a class template instantiation using X
itself as a template argument. More generally it is known as F-bound polymorphism, and it is a form of F-bounded quantification.
In software engineering, a fluent interface is an object-oriented API whose design relies extensively on method chaining. Its goal is to increase code legibility by creating a domain-specific language (DSL). The term was coined in 2005 by Eric Evans and Martin Fowler.
In object-oriented computer programming, a null object is an object with no referenced value or with defined neutral (null) behavior. The null object design pattern, which describes the uses of such objects and their behavior, was first published as "Void Value" and later in the Pattern Languages of Program Design book series as "Null Object".
In object-oriented programming, a virtual base class is a nested inner class whose functions and member variables can be overridden and redefined by subclasses of an outer class. Virtual classes are analogous to virtual functions.
In object-oriented design, the chain-of-responsibility pattern is a behavioral design pattern consisting of a source of command objects and a series of processing objects. Each processing object contains logic that defines the types of command objects that it can handle; the rest are passed to the next processing object in the chain. A mechanism also exists for adding new processing objects to the end of this chain.
The archetype pattern is a software design pattern that separates logic from implementation. The separation is accomplished through the creation of two abstract classes: a decorator, and a delegate. The Factory handles the mapping of decorator and delegate classes and returns the pair associated with a parameter or parameters passed. The interface is the contract between a decorator, a delegate, and the calling class, creating an Inversion of Responsibility. This example use two branches; however, you can have 'N' branches as required. The pattern means that one branch from the interface does not have to worry about how another branch operators as long it implements the interface.
{{cite book}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)