Skip to main content
Software Engineering

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

3
  • Thanks. That makes more sense of it that I could have. Since I'm thinking of having multiple ways of presenting the game, potentially a WPF app then possibly trying to host it online, does it make sense to have GameRunner focus on only one of those implementations and then later create a transformation layer to convert it to what the other presentation would need? Commented May 30, 2015 at 13:26
  • 1
    @Walker: you might transform this into a MVVM architecture (see en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Model_View_ViewModel). Model=GameState, View = your WPF classes, ViewModel=GameRunner, or an MVP architecture (Presenter=GameRunner). That way, your GameRunner depends only of an interface to the Presentation layer, which makes it easier to exchange the Presentation layer later. Commented May 30, 2015 at 18:03
  • 1
    @DocBrown I'll have to take a look more into MVVM and MVP to pick one but that seems like exactly the kind of structure I'm looking for. Thanks a lot! Commented May 30, 2015 at 18:20