From: Thorsten Ottosen (nesotto_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-10-09 09:21:29
"Dave Harris" <brangdon_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
news:memo.693391_at_cix.compulink.co.uk...
| In-Reply-To: <ck6la2$kki$1_at_[hidden]>
| nesotto_at_[hidden] (Thorsten Ottosen) wrote (abridged):
| > Conclusion: disallowing 0 will not only lead to simpler, safer
| > programs, but it will probably also boost performance.
|
| The null object pattern can only be used if all the object's member
| functions have trivial post-conditions. If instead I have code like:
|
| dog.walk_to( pTree );
| assert( dog.location() == pTree );
| // ... more code assuming the dog's location.
|
| then it is not going to work with a null_dog. If people use it anyway
| there will be tears before bedtime.
could you post your real code along with reasons for putting a null into the
tree
and maybe some comments about the density of null's in the tree.
Thanks
Thorsten