Skip to main content

What's the difference between aggregation and containment?

What's the difference between aggregation and containment?

Answer:
UML Question.
It was quite interesting story, because I wrote the difference in terms of COM and the interviewer meant C++. The only problem that when he drew the question, it turned out that he hardly knows terminology himself. Trust me, in terms of C++ (to be precise in terms of UML) there is NO difference between aggregation and containment. Aggregation IS containment and containment IS aggregation. There is a difference, however, between aggregation and composition. This question should sound: "What's the difference between aggregation and composition in terms of UML?". Back to answer. The difference between aggregation and composition is life term of participating objects. Aggregated object can exist without container. Composited object is managed by it's container and cannot live without it. Interviewer would probably expect that you will say that composition implemented by creating object by value and aggregation implemented by creating object by reference (or pointer), but strictly saying it's not true. The true difference is who manages the life cycle of the aggregated object.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Explain Polymorphism and Flavors of Polymorphism...

Polymorphism is the ability of different objects to react in an individual manner to the same message. This notion was imported from natural languages. For example, the verb "to close" means different things when applied to different objects. Closing a door, closing a bank account, or closing a program's window are all different actions; their exact meaning is determined by the object on which the action is performed. Most object-oriented languages implement polymorphism only in the form of virtual functions. But C++ has two more mechanisms of static (meaning: compile-time) polymorphism: Operator overloading. Applying the += operator to integers or string objects, for example, is interpreted by each of these objects in an individual manner. Obviously, the underlying implementation of += differs in every type. Yet, intuitively, we can predict what results are. Templates. A vector of integers, for example, reacts differently from a vector of string objects when it receives

Explain using static class member ..

A class member declared static is a single instance of that member shared by all instances of this class (that's why it is sometimes termed a class variable, as opposed to object variable). This feature has many uses: for instance, in order to create a file lock, one can use a static bool class member. An object trying to access this file has to check first whether the static (i.e., shared) flag is false. If it is, the object turns the flag on and processes the file safely, since other objects will now find that the flag is now on, and hence -- they cannot access the file. When the object processing the file is done, it has to turn off the flag, enabling another object to access it. How is a static member created? class fileProc { FILE *p; static bool isLocked; //only a declaration; see definition below... public: bool isLocked () const {return isLocked; } }; //somewhere outside the class definition: bool fileProc::isLocked; //definition; initialized to 'false' by defau

the Differences Between static_cast and reinterpret_cast

The operators static_cast and reinterpret_cast are similar: they both convert an object to an object of a different type. However, they aren't interchangeable. Static_cast uses the type information available at compile time to perform the conversion, making the necessary adjustments between the source and target types. Thus, its operation is relatively safe. On the other hand, reinterpret_cast simply reinterprets the bit pattern of a given object without changing its binary representation. To show the difference between the two, let's look at the following example: int n = 9; double d = static_cast < double > (n); In this example, we convert an int to a double. The binary representation of these types is very different. In order to convert the int 9 to a double, static_cast needs to properly pad the additional bytes of d. As expected, the result of the conversion is 9.0. Now let's see how reinterpret_cast behaves in this context: int n = 9; double d = reinterp