Talk:God object

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Computing (Rated Stub-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Stub-Class article Stub  This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 
Note icon
This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool as Stub-Class because it uses a stub template. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the |auto= parameter.

Not Enough to Wikify?[edit]

This article has a "Please wikify" template on it, but I don't see that there's enough to wikify here. The article is a stub; it doesn't naturally break down into any sub-sections, and no illustration ideas spring easily to mind. The only thing I can think of to add is perhaps a "See also" section, but it would simply point to anti-patterns and maybe object-oriented programming... both of which are already linked in the first paragraph.

How would we wikify this article?

Kai MacTane 02:33, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Not Enough to Wikify?[edit]

Nice artical. There should be a reference to the big ball of mud: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_ball_of_mud, because that's really what the God Object is

Big ball of mud is a much broader term than God object. The former refers to a system, the latter to a specific object or class. It is entirely possibly to have a BBoM that makes use of no God objects. Granted, there are some definate similarities, but personally I'm indifferent to mentioning it in this article. -19:45, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Discussion point[edit]

Is a monolithic Kernel a God Object? If so, is that a bad thing?1Z 18:32, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

A good kernel is not monolitic, but is combined from subsystems and auxiliary libraries. Also, a good kernel does not give orders — it only receives and executes them (such a problem was avoided in linux kernel by migrating from initrd to initramfs [1]). So yes, an opaque kernel with obscure structure is a God Object and is a bad thing. — Vano 20:33, 24 September 2007 (UTC)