Ex: Collections, IO Library, etc Framework : A set of cooperating classes that make up a reusable design for specific types of software. Ex: JUnit, Spring, etc Toolkit Framework Code reuse Design reuse Dictates the architecture or part of it by defining overall structure and key responsibilities of classes Delegate calls Create application specific subclasses of abstract classes from the framework We define the main body of the class and call the toolkit code we want to reuse Reuse the main body and write the code it calls Very helpful.
Faster to build applications this way. Also ensures same structure across different applications, hence easy to maintain. At the same time frameworks are guilty of enforcing stuff on the developers and loss of some creative freedom. Why are Design Patterns Important? Short: They help us solve recurring design problems. Yet most software eventually degrades to Advantages of Programming to Interface over an Implementation Clients remained decoupled and unaware of specific class they are using, as far as the underlying class adheres to the A framework is a structure, a skeleton.
The structure provides the developer something to build by, but the bits and pieces needed is up to the developer to provide. Frameworks often solve a set of problems, and takes care of some boilerplate code the developer would otherwise have to write.
A framework is a subsystem that contains the components you need for a set of problems. A library is a library. There ARE a large number of popular authors who say that it is, but there are an almost equal number of people who say that it isn't. A search for embedded or micro controller frameworks reveals a whole plethora which do NOT use IoC and I now believe that the. To say that IoC is the defining characteristic is simply too rigid for me to accept I'm afraid, and rejects out of hand anything putting itself forward as a framework which matches the historical representation as mentioned above.
For details of non-IoC frameworks, see, as mentioned above, many embedded and micro frameworks, as well as any historical framework in a language that does not provide callback through the language OK. Callbacks can be hacked for any device with a modern register system, but not by the average programmer , and obviously, the.
NET framework. The answer provided by Barrass is probably the most complete. However, the explanation could easily be stated more clearly.
Most people miss the fact that these are all nested concepts. So let me lay it out for you. A framework is a robust library or collection of libraries that provides a "foundation" for your code. A framework follows the Inversion of Control pattern. For example, the. NET framework is a large collection of cohesive libraries in which you build your application on top of. You can argue there isn't a big difference between a framework and a library, but when people say "framework" it typically implies a larger, more robust suite of libraries which will play an integral part of an application.
I think of a toolkit the same way I think of an SDK. It comes with documentation, examples, libraries, wrappers, etc. Again, you can say this is the same as a framework and you would probably be right to do so. I think it's unanimous that a library is code already coded that you can use so as not to have to code it again. The code must be organized in a way that allows you to look up the functionality you want and use it from your own code. Most programming languages come with standard libraries, especially some code that implements some kind of collection.
This is always for the convenience that you don't have to code these things yourself. Similarly, most programming languages have construct to allow you to look up functionality from libraries, with things like dynamic linking, namespaces, etc.
A set of tools used for a particular purpose. This is unanimous. The question is, what is considered a tool and what isn't. I'd say there's no fixed definition, it depends on the context of the thing calling itself a toolkit.
Example of tools could be libraries, widgets, scripts, programs, editors, documentation, servers, debuggers, etc. Another thing to note is the "particular purpose". This is always true, but the scope of the purpose can easily change based on who made the toolkit.
So it can easily be a programmer's toolkit, or it can be a string parsing toolkit. One is so broad, it could have tool touching everything programming related, while the other is more precise. SDKs are generally toolkits, in that they try and bundle a set of tools often of multiple kind into a single package.
I think the common thread is that a tool does something for you, either completely, or it helps you do it. And a toolkit is simply a set of tools which all perform or help you perform a particular set of activities. Frameworks aren't quite as unanimously defined. It seems to be a bit of a blanket term for anything that can frame your code.
Which would mean: any structure that underlies or supports your code. This implies that you build your code against a framework, whereas you build a library against your code. But, it seems that sometimes the word framework is used in the same sense as toolkit or even library. So you would consider it a toolkit to C development on Windows.
Mono being a toolkit for C development on Linux. Yet they called it a framework. It makes sense to think of it this way too, since it kinds of frame your code, but a frame should more support and hold things together, then do any kind of work, so my opinion is this is not the way you should use the word. And I think the industry is trying to move into having framework mean an already written program with missing pieces that you must provide or customize. Which I think is a good thing, since toolkit and library are great precise terms for other usages of "framework".
Framework: installed on you machine and allowing you to interact with it. Library: aims to solve a certain problem or several problems related to the same category. Toolkit: a collection of many pieces of code that can solve multiple problems on multiple issues just like a toolbox. It's a little bit subjective I think. The toolkit is the easiest. It's just a bunch of methods, classes that can be use.
The library vs the framework question I make difference by the way to use them. I read somewhere the perfect answer a long time ago. The framework calls your code, but on the other hand your code calls the library. Let's say you implement the ISerializable interface. Net in one of your classes. You make use of the framework qualities of. Net then, rather than it's library qualities.
You fill in the "white spots" as mittag said and you have the skeleton completed. You must know in advance how the framework is going to "react" with your code.
The full, complete answer to your question is given very lucidly in Chapter 19 the whole chapter devoted to just this theme of this book , which is a very good book by the way not at all "just for Smalltalk".
Others have noted that. Entity Framework for dealing with databases is a part of. You let it know your models it figures out what to do with them.
As a programmer it requires you to understand "the mind of the framework", or more realistically the mind of the designer and what they are going to do with your inputs. It would never understand how to take a parent child relationship and translate it from object to relational, you'd use multiple tools to do that. But you would have much more control on how that data was stored, when, transactions, etc. Stack Overflow for Teams — Collaborate and share knowledge with a private group.
Create a free Team What is Teams?
0コメント