[quiq]

First job out of school my coworker was talking about how nice dotnet Stream API was. I had a Stream. Streams have Position. A GZipStream is a Stream. A GZipStream does not have position. Countless hours of Java style "OOP" indoctrination flashed before my eyes and I realized that even something as big as Dotnet could do such a thing. It made me feel like a kid that just realized their parents aren't infallible.

[sk5t]

I dunno, I'd prefer a consistent Stream interface that just sometimes doesn't have a position, and wraps other Streams with little fuss, rather than have to change gears into Source/Sink lexicon.

[quiq]

I see where you're coming from, and hey, the thing works. Not everything is perfect, but the Stream API could definitely be better.

I agree it would be nice to have a consistent interface. The problem is it's neither consistent nor an interface, it's an inconsistent hierarchy of subclasses. There's always fuss because everyone is going to get bitten by it at some point. It's just a poor abstraction, and it leaves a bad taste in your mouth as a library (well, framework) consumer.

Microsoft promised me that they gave me a thing that had certain features and capabilities using industry standard terminology and knowledge. There's a contract. If you go out for a car loan that says "0% APR for 12 months!" You expect that to be the first 12 months, not "0% APR only on days divisible by 7 during leap years, up to a total of 12 * 30 days over the course of the next millennium, otherwise 7.5%"

[nathanaldensr]

Thank you for eloquently summarizing my "violates SOLID principles" comment. Rigid OOP class hierarchies suck, in general.