User talk:Ryguasu/Design Patterns

Is the Gang of Four's "Design Patterns" of More Than Historical Interest?
I'm hoping to read up on Design pattern (computer science). It seems like the logical place to start might be where the description of design patterns began, i.e., with the Gang of Four's "Design Patterns". That book is almost ten years old now, though, so before I run out and buy it, I'm wondering if it has in any sense become "outdated". Is this book now better suited for those studying the history of programming than for those studying programming itself? Or does it still make sense as a good place to start learning about design patterns? --Ryguasu 19:45, 17 January 2005 (UTC)


 * I'm sure it remains a perfectly good place to start, this is pretty timeless stuff, but if you don't mind reading on line, you probably won't find much in the book that is not also by now on line. -- Jmabel | Talk 21:22, 17 January 2005 (UTC)


 * It's still a good, worthwhile read. It's well written and thoughtfully structured, and the patterns it describes abound in current OO systems like the class libraries for java and c#.  I guess it's no longer (if it ever was) a definative library of the patterns themselves, with numerous new ones being created and some of the existing falling from favour.  But what's important isn't the list of patterns per-se, but the principle (you can find endless list of patterns and discussions on their pros and cons for free on the internet).  But if you read that, beg borrow steal or save up for The Timeless Way of Building, the original pattern language book (and pleasantly one without all that dull comp-sci stuff to get between your brain and the idea) - it's simply brilliant. -- John Fader 22:47, 17 January 2005 (UTC)


 * A good place to dig around online is the Portland Pattern Repository, aka the Wiki. -- Cyrius|&#9998; 22:52, 17 January 2005 (UTC)