Separating mechanism from policy is very important issue of SW design.

This is also true for microscopic area – implementing function.

Here is one of simplest example – function that calculates area of rectangle.

int rect_area(int left, int top, int right, int bottom) { return (right - left) * (bottom - top); }

Simple, isn’t it?

But, this function doesn’t have any exception/error handling.

Let’s add some of them.

int rect_area(int left, int top, int right, int bottom) { if (left >= right) left = right; if (top >= bottom) top = bottom; return (right - left) * (bottom - top); }

It’s seems good.

Soon after, another function that calculates area of rectangle is needed.

But, this function should return error value if input rectangle is invalid.

I think quick solution is

int rect_area2(int left, int top, int right, int bottom) { if (left > right || top > bottom) return -1; return (right - left) * (bottom - top); }

But, in this solution, code for calculating area of rectangle is duplicated.

At above example, this is just one-line code. So, duplicating is not a big deal.

But, it’s not good in terms of code structure.

Why did this happen?

Calculating rectangle area is ‘Mechanism’.

But, exception/error handling is ‘Policy’ at this example.

So, above example should be implemented like below.

static inline int _rect_area(int left, int top, int right, int bottom) { return (right - left) * (bottom - top); } int rect_area(int left, int top, int right, int bottom) { if (left >= right) left = right; if (top >= bottom) top = bottom; return _rect_area(left, top, right, bottom); } int rect_area2(int left, int top, int right, int bottom) { if (left > right || top > bottom) return -1; return _rect_area(left, top, right, bottom); }

Can you know the difference?

‘_rect_area’ is implementation of pure ‘Mechanism’.

And policy is implemented at each interface function.

Even for simple function, developer should consider CONCEPT of separating Mechanism from Policy.