Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account


#ActualKhatharr

Posted 15 November 2012 - 11:07 PM

I'll agree. OOP doesn't make a whole lot of sense here.


Representing each piece as an object doesn't make sense, but OOP is fine in terms of implementing the board itself. A class would be a good way to isolate the data and provide a standard means of observation and safe manipulation. The benefit, like frob pointed out, is that implementing in this way allows a 'player' to be more or less anything (local player, network player, AI, chicken with a USB port wired to its brain, etc).

#2Khatharr

Posted 15 November 2012 - 11:05 PM

I'll agree. OOP doesn't make a whole lot of sense here.


Representing each piece as an object doesn't make sense, but OOP is fine in terms of implementing the board itself. A class would be a good way to isolate the data and provide a standard means of observation and safe manipulation. The benefit, like frob pointed out, is that implementing in this way allows a 'player' to be more or less anything (local player, network player, AI, chicken with a keyboard strapped to its feet, etc).

#1Khatharr

Posted 15 November 2012 - 11:03 PM

I'll agree. OOP doesn't make a whole lot of sense here.


Representing each piece as an object doesn't make sense, but OOP is fine in terms of implementing the board itself. A class would be a good way to isolate the data and provide a standard means of observation and safe manipulation. The benefit, like frob pointed out, is that implementing in this way allows the same interface to be used by either a human player or an AI.

PARTNERS