Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

// request.cf · coarse context

A page that knows where it met you.

Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.

Country
US
Cloudflare location
CMH
Connection
HTTP/2
Language
Not provided

Ray ID: a21e8d575fdedafe

Jump to content

File talk:AggregationAndComposition.svg

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 16 years ago by Charrua85 in topic Composition

Plural class name

[edit]

I think the class "Ducks" in this image should be renamed to "Duck", as class names are usually singular nouns, plus it would be consistent with the rest of the diagram. In Object_composition#UML Notation, the code example below the image uses the singular as well. Wikipedia didn't let me overwrite the image, either because I only registered recently or I'm doing something wrong. Would someone else please make the change instead? En-Cu-Kou (talk) 12:50, 20 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

Done. —Tobias Bergemann (talk) 07:58, 21 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

PNG preview

[edit]

Right now, the PNG preview looks horrible, although the SVG source seems to be fine. Maybe a re-upload would help? I still don't have the necessary privileges for it. En-Cu-Kou (talk) 15:48, 30 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Composition

[edit]

The cardinality is wrong on the diagram. You have a life dependency between car and carburetor which means that any carburetor must have a car, therefore if you remove the car you also should remove the carburetor. Thus it can't be 0..1 but 1..1, 1..0, etc. If you wanna have a carburetor without car, then use an aggregation.--Charrua85 (talk) 22:54, 10 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

While I initially agreed with the above user, http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa475230.aspx also says that a multiplicity of 0..1 is allowed with composite relationships. I think it's stupid, but it appears that's how it is :-\