Vintage 90s Navy Blue Corduroy Long Sleeve Shirt. Press sizing&care section for precise measurements of this item. Marked size: L, Estimated Size: M - L depending on how you like your fit. Chest: 48.5 In (123 cm), Shirt length: 30.8 In (78 cm), Sleeve length: 23.3 In (59 cm), Shoulder to shoulder: 21.7 In (55 cm). Material: 100% cotton. The model is 183cm (6ft) tall and usually wears size S/M clothes. Sending out next business day. Be sure to contact us with any questions :) P.S Follow us on Facebook (fb.com/kaleidoo) or IG-kaleidooclothing and get 20% off code for this purchase! Message us for code here on ASOSmarketplace!
Estimated Size: M - L depending on how you like your fit. Chest: 48.5 In (123 cm), Shirt length: 30.8 In (78 cm), Sleeve length: 23.3 In (59 cm), Shoulder to shoulder: 21.7 In (55 cm)
Vintage 90's Puma black & white ringer style short sleeve t-shirt. Label says size M fits UK size 8-14 depending on fit preference.Model is a UK size 8 and is 5'6". ORDER BEFORE 2.45PM FOR SAME DAY DISPATCH. Next day delivery is available Monday - Friday only. Please get in touch for Saturday delivery. All orders placed after 2.45pm Friday will not be processed until the following Monday. All measurements are provided under the sizing and care tab, to ensure the desired fit please check these against yourself or a similar item of clothing that you may own. All of our items are vintage, we only ever have one of each item available. Returns accepted within 14 days of purchase. If you have any questions about this item or anything else please just drop us a message we will be happy to help. Follow us on Instagram to see all of our latest updates thevintagescene.
The “Open Closed Principle” is usually summarised as code should be “open to extension” but “closed to modification”. The way I often express it is that when I am adding a new feature to an application, I want to as much as possible be writing new code, rather than changing existing code.
However, I noticed there has been some pushback on this concept from none other than the legendary Jon Skeet. His objection seems to be based on the understanding that OCP dictates that you should never change existing code. And I agree; that would be ridiculous. It would encourage an approach to writing code where you added extensibility points at every conceivable juncture – all methods virtual, events firing before and after everything, XML configuration allowing any class to be swapped out, etc, etc. Clearly this would lead to code so flexible that no one could work out what it was supposed to do. It would also violate another well-established principle – YAGNI (You ain’t gonna need it). I (usually) don’t know in advance in what way I’ll need to extend my system, so why complicate matters by adding numerous extensibility points that will never be used (or more likely, still need to be modified before they can be used)?
So in a nutshell, here’s my take on OCP. When I’m writing the initial version of my code, I simply focus on writing clean maintainable code, and don’t add extensibility points unless I know for sure they are needed for an upcoming feature. (so yes, I write code that doesn’t yet adhere to OCP).
But when I add a new feature that requires a modification to that original code, instead of just sticking all the new code in there alongside the old, I refactor the original class to add the extensibility points I need. Then the new feature can be added in an isolated way, without adding additional responsibilities to the original class. The benefit of this approach is that you get extensibility points that are actually useful (because they are being used), and they are more likely to enable further new features in the future.
OCP encourages you to make your classes extensible, but doesn’t stipulate how you do so. Here’s some of the most common techniques:
Pass dependencies as interfaces into your class allowing callers to provide their own implementations
It is clear that OCP is in fact very closely related to SRP (Single Responsibility Principle). Violations of OCP result in violations of SRP. If you can’t extend the class from outside, you will end up sticking more and more code inside the class, resulting in an ever-growing list of responsibilities.
In summary, for me OCP shouldn’t mean you’re not allowed to change any code after writing it. Rather, it’s about how you change it when a new feature comes along. First, refactor to make it extensible, then extend it. Or to put it another way that I’ve said before on this blog, “the only real reasons to change the existing code are to fix bugs, and to make it more extensible”.
Privacy and Cookies: This site uses cookies but will still work if you choose not to accept them. For more information, see: Privacy Policy	
Arlin Smith, Co-Owner and Operating Manager of Big Tree Hospitality, discusses how the team at marlo marketing understood the marketing and strategy needs for Eventide Oyster Company when it opened its new Fenway location.