From a java class(Action class) we are accessing the business delegate. The code is written in such a way that we are able to access/use only the Business Delegate interfaces and the actual Business Delegate implimentation is hidden behind the Business Delegate interfaces. The main objective of the Business Delegate implimentation is to get a remote object(EJB object).
Any idea, what Design pattern does the above statement represents?
You are using Business Delegatepattern! Bridge pattern is not used for implementing interfaces. Just look at the definition of Bridge, it clearly says, when abstraction can change independent of implementation. Can we change the interface here and expect the implementation to work or vice versa?
Splitting abstraction and implementation is just a good OOD practice. Not a pattern. However certain patterns like Strategy etc uses this practice.
Joined: Sep 03, 2004
I don't think so, the two should be implemented to solve different problems. What I'm saying is, if your implementing you business delegate in a way that the interface and the implementation can vary without affecting one another, then you're using the Bridge pattern to implement your Business Delegate. But the Business Delegate is suppose to serve a very different purpose.
Joined: Nov 16, 2006
very well said henrique,
thanks guys for the responces Greatly appreciate it J