Consider a 'NotificationService' responsible for sending notifications. Which option violates DIP?
Different channels like 'SMSChannel' implement the 'INotificationChannel' interface.
The 'NotificationService' depends on an 'INotificationChannel' interface.
The 'NotificationService' accepts an 'INotificationChannel' in its constructor.
The 'NotificationService' directly instantiates and uses an 'EmailSender' class.
How does the Open/Closed Principle contribute to creating maintainable code?
It allows for easier addition of new features without impacting existing ones.
It makes the codebase smaller.
It eliminates the need for testing.
It reduces the need for code documentation.
SOLID principles primarily aim to improve which aspect of software development?
Execution Speed
Algorithm Efficiency
Memory Optimization
Code Maintainability
Consider a base class 'Bird' with a method 'fly()'. You create a subclass 'Penguin'. What would be the most LSP-compliant approach in this scenario?
Have 'Penguin' inherit 'fly()' and throw an exception, as penguins cannot fly.
Remove the 'fly()' method from the 'Bird' class entirely.
Rethink the inheritance hierarchy. 'Bird' might not be the right superclass for 'Penguin' if flying is a core characteristic.
Have 'Penguin' inherit 'fly()' but leave it empty, as penguins don't need to fly.
What could be a potential downside of excessively applying the Interface Segregation Principle?
It violates the principles of object-oriented programming.
It reduces code reusability.
It makes the code more difficult to unit test.
It can lead to a higher number of interfaces, potentially increasing code complexity.
A class EmailService implements an interface ICommunication with methods sendEmail(), sendSMS(), and makeCall(). Only the email functionality is relevant to EmailService. How can this design be improved according to ISP?
EmailService
ICommunication
sendEmail()
sendSMS()
makeCall()
Create separate interfaces: IEmailService, ISMSService, and ICallService, and have EmailService implement only IEmailService.
IEmailService
ISMSService
ICallService
Keep the current design, as it provides a single point of access for all communication methods.
Move all methods (sendEmail(), sendSMS(), makeCall()) to the EmailService class.
Throw an exception in EmailService for the unused methods: sendSMS() and makeCall().
Why is adhering to the Liskov Substitution Principle important in software development?
It enforces the use of design patterns, making code more readable.
It ensures that all methods have the same name across different classes.
It promotes code reusability, maintainability, and reduces the risk of unexpected bugs when modifying code.
It helps reduce the number of lines of code.
What is the primary purpose of the Open/Closed Principle?
To ensure all methods are open for modification
To prevent modification of existing code
To enforce the use of abstract classes
To allow extending functionality without altering existing code
What is the core idea behind the Liskov Substitution Principle (LSP)?
Interfaces should be small and focused on a single task.
Classes should have only one responsibility.
Code should be open for extension, but closed for modification.
Subtypes should be substitutable for their base types without altering the correctness of the program.
Which scenario best exemplifies the Dependency Inversion Principle?
A 'DataProcessor' class depends on an 'IDataSource' interface, not a specific database implementation.
A 'LightSwitch' class is directly dependent on a 'LightBulb' class.
A 'Car' class directly instantiates and uses an 'Engine' class.
A 'Logger' class writes logs directly to a file.