Single-responsibility principle

The single-responsibility principle (SRP) is a computer-programming principle that states that every module or class[1] should have responsibility over a single part of the functionality provided by the software, and that responsibility should be entirely encapsulated by the class, module or function. All its services should be narrowly aligned with that responsibility. Robert C. Martin expresses the principle as, "A class should have only one reason to change,"[1] although, because of confusion around the word "reason" he more recently stated "This principle is about people."[2]

SOLID
Principles

History

The term was introduced by Robert C. Martin in an article by the same name as part of his Principles of Object Oriented Design,[3] made popular by his book Agile Software Development, Principles, Patterns, and Practices.[4] Martin described it as being based on the principle of cohesion, as described by Tom DeMarco in his book Structured Analysis and System Specification,[5] and Meilir Page-Jones in The Practical Guide to Structured Systems Design.[6] In 2014 Martin wrote a blog post entitled The Single Responsibility Principle with a goal to clarify what was meant by the phrase "reason for change."

Example

Martin defines a responsibility as a reason to change, and concludes that a class or module should have one, and only one, reason to be changed (e.g. rewritten). As an example, consider a module that compiles and prints a report. Imagine such a module can be changed for two reasons. First, the content of the report could change. Second, the format of the report could change. These two things change for very different causes; one substantive, and one cosmetic. The single-responsibility principle says that these two aspects of the problem are really two separate responsibilities, and should, therefore, be in separate classes or modules. It would be a bad design to couple two things that change for different reasons at different times.

The reason it is important to keep a class focused on a single concern is that it makes the class more robust. Continuing with the foregoing example, if there is a change to the report compilation process, there is a greater danger that the printing code will break if it is part of the same class.

gollark: ++eval 5
gollark: ++eval test
gollark: ++eval sin 6
gollark: ++eval invalid junk
gollark: ++eval 2 * 8

See also

References
  1. Martin, Robert C. (2003). Agile Software Development, Principles, Patterns, and Practices. Prentice Hall. p. 95. ISBN 978-0135974445.CS1 maint: ref=harv (link)
  2. "The Single Responsibility Principle". ArticleS.UncleBob. 2014.
  3. "The Principles of OOD". ArticleS.UncleBob. 2005.
  4. Martin 2003, pp. 95-98
  5. DeMarco, Tom. (1979). Structured Analysis and System Specification. Prentice Hall. ISBN 0-13-854380-1.
  6. Page-Jones, Meilir (1988). The Practical Guide to Structured Systems Design. Yourdon Press Computing Series. p. 82. ISBN 978-8120314825.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.