Simple factory vs Factory method











up vote
1
down vote

favorite












Simple factory:
enter image description here



Factory method:



enter image description here



hey everyone. I am looking for the difference between simple factory and factory method.. I know the structural difference(images above), but I cant understand difference in use cases. for example, this is the explanation for factory method:




In Factory Method pattern we will introduce a new interface called
‘IMobileFactory’ and two concrete implementation’s ‘NokiaFactory’ and
‘IphoneFactory’. These concrete classes control the object creation.



In my example the client want a Nokia object. So the steps are given
below.



1.The client will load a reference to ‘NokiaFactory’. But Client won’t refer the ‘NokiaFactory’ class directly like the Simple Factory
pattern. The client refers the concrete implementation through an
interface ‘IMobileFactory’.



2.Then the Client call the ‘CreateMobile()’ method that will return an object of type ‘IMobile’.



3.Here we have to inform the client the concrete implementation to be used through some configuration or parameters.




I can't understand the first step:




But Client won’t refer the ‘NokiaFactory’ class directly like the
Simple Factory pattern. The client refers the concrete implementation
through an interface ‘IMobileFactory’.




so client writes something like this:



IMobileFactory factory = LoadFactory("NokiaFactory");


so why is that useful and better? what's the benefit? why shouldn't I just write this:



NokiaFactory factory = new NokiaFactory();


or what about that:



IMobileFactory factory = new NokiaFactory();









share|improve this question
























  • Not really a fan of either; I would rather the author inject the reference to an IMobileFactory instance during the constructor call. Either way, the goal is to avoid directly referencing concrete classes and use interfaces. Using an interface will make your code more flexible for testing / new use cases because it is not coupled to a single implementation.
    – flakes
    yesterday

















up vote
1
down vote

favorite












Simple factory:
enter image description here



Factory method:



enter image description here



hey everyone. I am looking for the difference between simple factory and factory method.. I know the structural difference(images above), but I cant understand difference in use cases. for example, this is the explanation for factory method:




In Factory Method pattern we will introduce a new interface called
‘IMobileFactory’ and two concrete implementation’s ‘NokiaFactory’ and
‘IphoneFactory’. These concrete classes control the object creation.



In my example the client want a Nokia object. So the steps are given
below.



1.The client will load a reference to ‘NokiaFactory’. But Client won’t refer the ‘NokiaFactory’ class directly like the Simple Factory
pattern. The client refers the concrete implementation through an
interface ‘IMobileFactory’.



2.Then the Client call the ‘CreateMobile()’ method that will return an object of type ‘IMobile’.



3.Here we have to inform the client the concrete implementation to be used through some configuration or parameters.




I can't understand the first step:




But Client won’t refer the ‘NokiaFactory’ class directly like the
Simple Factory pattern. The client refers the concrete implementation
through an interface ‘IMobileFactory’.




so client writes something like this:



IMobileFactory factory = LoadFactory("NokiaFactory");


so why is that useful and better? what's the benefit? why shouldn't I just write this:



NokiaFactory factory = new NokiaFactory();


or what about that:



IMobileFactory factory = new NokiaFactory();









share|improve this question
























  • Not really a fan of either; I would rather the author inject the reference to an IMobileFactory instance during the constructor call. Either way, the goal is to avoid directly referencing concrete classes and use interfaces. Using an interface will make your code more flexible for testing / new use cases because it is not coupled to a single implementation.
    – flakes
    yesterday















up vote
1
down vote

favorite









up vote
1
down vote

favorite











Simple factory:
enter image description here



Factory method:



enter image description here



hey everyone. I am looking for the difference between simple factory and factory method.. I know the structural difference(images above), but I cant understand difference in use cases. for example, this is the explanation for factory method:




In Factory Method pattern we will introduce a new interface called
‘IMobileFactory’ and two concrete implementation’s ‘NokiaFactory’ and
‘IphoneFactory’. These concrete classes control the object creation.



In my example the client want a Nokia object. So the steps are given
below.



1.The client will load a reference to ‘NokiaFactory’. But Client won’t refer the ‘NokiaFactory’ class directly like the Simple Factory
pattern. The client refers the concrete implementation through an
interface ‘IMobileFactory’.



2.Then the Client call the ‘CreateMobile()’ method that will return an object of type ‘IMobile’.



3.Here we have to inform the client the concrete implementation to be used through some configuration or parameters.




I can't understand the first step:




But Client won’t refer the ‘NokiaFactory’ class directly like the
Simple Factory pattern. The client refers the concrete implementation
through an interface ‘IMobileFactory’.




so client writes something like this:



IMobileFactory factory = LoadFactory("NokiaFactory");


so why is that useful and better? what's the benefit? why shouldn't I just write this:



NokiaFactory factory = new NokiaFactory();


or what about that:



IMobileFactory factory = new NokiaFactory();









share|improve this question















Simple factory:
enter image description here



Factory method:



enter image description here



hey everyone. I am looking for the difference between simple factory and factory method.. I know the structural difference(images above), but I cant understand difference in use cases. for example, this is the explanation for factory method:




In Factory Method pattern we will introduce a new interface called
‘IMobileFactory’ and two concrete implementation’s ‘NokiaFactory’ and
‘IphoneFactory’. These concrete classes control the object creation.



In my example the client want a Nokia object. So the steps are given
below.



1.The client will load a reference to ‘NokiaFactory’. But Client won’t refer the ‘NokiaFactory’ class directly like the Simple Factory
pattern. The client refers the concrete implementation through an
interface ‘IMobileFactory’.



2.Then the Client call the ‘CreateMobile()’ method that will return an object of type ‘IMobile’.



3.Here we have to inform the client the concrete implementation to be used through some configuration or parameters.




I can't understand the first step:




But Client won’t refer the ‘NokiaFactory’ class directly like the
Simple Factory pattern. The client refers the concrete implementation
through an interface ‘IMobileFactory’.




so client writes something like this:



IMobileFactory factory = LoadFactory("NokiaFactory");


so why is that useful and better? what's the benefit? why shouldn't I just write this:



NokiaFactory factory = new NokiaFactory();


or what about that:



IMobileFactory factory = new NokiaFactory();






java oop design-patterns factory-pattern factory-method






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited yesterday

























asked yesterday









O. Shekriladze

406




406












  • Not really a fan of either; I would rather the author inject the reference to an IMobileFactory instance during the constructor call. Either way, the goal is to avoid directly referencing concrete classes and use interfaces. Using an interface will make your code more flexible for testing / new use cases because it is not coupled to a single implementation.
    – flakes
    yesterday




















  • Not really a fan of either; I would rather the author inject the reference to an IMobileFactory instance during the constructor call. Either way, the goal is to avoid directly referencing concrete classes and use interfaces. Using an interface will make your code more flexible for testing / new use cases because it is not coupled to a single implementation.
    – flakes
    yesterday


















Not really a fan of either; I would rather the author inject the reference to an IMobileFactory instance during the constructor call. Either way, the goal is to avoid directly referencing concrete classes and use interfaces. Using an interface will make your code more flexible for testing / new use cases because it is not coupled to a single implementation.
– flakes
yesterday






Not really a fan of either; I would rather the author inject the reference to an IMobileFactory instance during the constructor call. Either way, the goal is to avoid directly referencing concrete classes and use interfaces. Using an interface will make your code more flexible for testing / new use cases because it is not coupled to a single implementation.
– flakes
yesterday














3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
2
down vote



accepted










So your question is about comparing this design #1:



IMobileFactory factory = LoadFactory("NokiaFactory");


to this design #2:



NokiaFactory factory = new NokiaFactory(); // or:
IMobileFactory factory = new NokiaFactory();


As you see the biggest difference is that, while the client in the design #1 does not know about any concrete type like NokiaFactory or IPhoneFactory, the client in the design #2 does.



The downside of knowing about concrete things like NokiaFactory or IPhoneFactory should be well-known. If you want to make changes to these types, for example, you want to add a new method to NokiaFactory and this method is not a part of the IMobileFactory interface, then the client code will be affected unnecessarily. The client does not care about the new method, but its code must be recompiled/redeployed.



UPDATE



To explain more.



For example, a new method named Foo is added to the NokiaFactory class:



class NokiaFactory {
// old code
public void Foo() { ... }
}


Foo is not a method of the IMobileFactory interface but it is added to NokiaFactory because there is another client who requires the method, and that client is happy to depend on NokiaFactory class. In other words, that client would welcome changes from NokiaFactory class, but the first client would not.






share|improve this answer























  • I cant understand this part: "you want to add a new method to NokiaFactory and this method is not a part of the IMobileFactory interface, then client code will be affected unnecessarily". could you explain me this clearly?
    – O. Shekriladze
    yesterday












  • Yes, edited my answer.
    – Nghia Bui
    yesterday


















up vote
2
down vote













You need the interface to avoid creating different flow per type, for 10 types you will have 1 lines of code instead of 10



IMobileFactory factory = loadFactory(myFactoryName);


instead of per type:



NokiaFactory factory = new NokiaFactory();
...
IphoneFactory factory = new IphoneFactory();
...


The difference between using loadFactory method to new NokiaFactory() is that you don't need to explicitly create a new object, you delegate object creation to loadFactory which returns relevant object






share|improve this answer






























    up vote
    0
    down vote













    From the design perspective:




    • Use SimpleFactory when the types of Objects are not fixed. For example: Phones my manufacturer - Nokia, iPhone. May be you want to add a new manufacturer tomorrow.


    • Use Factory method when the types of Objects are fixed. For example: Phones by type - Landline and Mobile.



    Finally, it comes down to how you want to design your system. What you want to be extendable.






    share|improve this answer





















    • binpress.com/factory-design-pattern/… according to this article it's vice-versa
      – O. Shekriladze
      yesterday












    • As I understand the post, it says the same thing I mentioned here. Use Factory method for Toys by location and use SimpleFactory for Toys by type.
      – Dakshinamurthy Karra
      yesterday











    Your Answer






    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
    StackExchange.snippets.init();
    });
    });
    }, "code-snippets");

    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "1"
    };
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
    createEditor();
    });
    }
    else {
    createEditor();
    }
    });

    function createEditor() {
    StackExchange.prepareEditor({
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    convertImagesToLinks: true,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: 10,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader: {
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    },
    onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    });


    }
    });














     

    draft saved


    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53372254%2fsimple-factory-vs-factory-method%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    3 Answers
    3






    active

    oldest

    votes








    3 Answers
    3






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes








    up vote
    2
    down vote



    accepted










    So your question is about comparing this design #1:



    IMobileFactory factory = LoadFactory("NokiaFactory");


    to this design #2:



    NokiaFactory factory = new NokiaFactory(); // or:
    IMobileFactory factory = new NokiaFactory();


    As you see the biggest difference is that, while the client in the design #1 does not know about any concrete type like NokiaFactory or IPhoneFactory, the client in the design #2 does.



    The downside of knowing about concrete things like NokiaFactory or IPhoneFactory should be well-known. If you want to make changes to these types, for example, you want to add a new method to NokiaFactory and this method is not a part of the IMobileFactory interface, then the client code will be affected unnecessarily. The client does not care about the new method, but its code must be recompiled/redeployed.



    UPDATE



    To explain more.



    For example, a new method named Foo is added to the NokiaFactory class:



    class NokiaFactory {
    // old code
    public void Foo() { ... }
    }


    Foo is not a method of the IMobileFactory interface but it is added to NokiaFactory because there is another client who requires the method, and that client is happy to depend on NokiaFactory class. In other words, that client would welcome changes from NokiaFactory class, but the first client would not.






    share|improve this answer























    • I cant understand this part: "you want to add a new method to NokiaFactory and this method is not a part of the IMobileFactory interface, then client code will be affected unnecessarily". could you explain me this clearly?
      – O. Shekriladze
      yesterday












    • Yes, edited my answer.
      – Nghia Bui
      yesterday















    up vote
    2
    down vote



    accepted










    So your question is about comparing this design #1:



    IMobileFactory factory = LoadFactory("NokiaFactory");


    to this design #2:



    NokiaFactory factory = new NokiaFactory(); // or:
    IMobileFactory factory = new NokiaFactory();


    As you see the biggest difference is that, while the client in the design #1 does not know about any concrete type like NokiaFactory or IPhoneFactory, the client in the design #2 does.



    The downside of knowing about concrete things like NokiaFactory or IPhoneFactory should be well-known. If you want to make changes to these types, for example, you want to add a new method to NokiaFactory and this method is not a part of the IMobileFactory interface, then the client code will be affected unnecessarily. The client does not care about the new method, but its code must be recompiled/redeployed.



    UPDATE



    To explain more.



    For example, a new method named Foo is added to the NokiaFactory class:



    class NokiaFactory {
    // old code
    public void Foo() { ... }
    }


    Foo is not a method of the IMobileFactory interface but it is added to NokiaFactory because there is another client who requires the method, and that client is happy to depend on NokiaFactory class. In other words, that client would welcome changes from NokiaFactory class, but the first client would not.






    share|improve this answer























    • I cant understand this part: "you want to add a new method to NokiaFactory and this method is not a part of the IMobileFactory interface, then client code will be affected unnecessarily". could you explain me this clearly?
      – O. Shekriladze
      yesterday












    • Yes, edited my answer.
      – Nghia Bui
      yesterday













    up vote
    2
    down vote



    accepted







    up vote
    2
    down vote



    accepted






    So your question is about comparing this design #1:



    IMobileFactory factory = LoadFactory("NokiaFactory");


    to this design #2:



    NokiaFactory factory = new NokiaFactory(); // or:
    IMobileFactory factory = new NokiaFactory();


    As you see the biggest difference is that, while the client in the design #1 does not know about any concrete type like NokiaFactory or IPhoneFactory, the client in the design #2 does.



    The downside of knowing about concrete things like NokiaFactory or IPhoneFactory should be well-known. If you want to make changes to these types, for example, you want to add a new method to NokiaFactory and this method is not a part of the IMobileFactory interface, then the client code will be affected unnecessarily. The client does not care about the new method, but its code must be recompiled/redeployed.



    UPDATE



    To explain more.



    For example, a new method named Foo is added to the NokiaFactory class:



    class NokiaFactory {
    // old code
    public void Foo() { ... }
    }


    Foo is not a method of the IMobileFactory interface but it is added to NokiaFactory because there is another client who requires the method, and that client is happy to depend on NokiaFactory class. In other words, that client would welcome changes from NokiaFactory class, but the first client would not.






    share|improve this answer














    So your question is about comparing this design #1:



    IMobileFactory factory = LoadFactory("NokiaFactory");


    to this design #2:



    NokiaFactory factory = new NokiaFactory(); // or:
    IMobileFactory factory = new NokiaFactory();


    As you see the biggest difference is that, while the client in the design #1 does not know about any concrete type like NokiaFactory or IPhoneFactory, the client in the design #2 does.



    The downside of knowing about concrete things like NokiaFactory or IPhoneFactory should be well-known. If you want to make changes to these types, for example, you want to add a new method to NokiaFactory and this method is not a part of the IMobileFactory interface, then the client code will be affected unnecessarily. The client does not care about the new method, but its code must be recompiled/redeployed.



    UPDATE



    To explain more.



    For example, a new method named Foo is added to the NokiaFactory class:



    class NokiaFactory {
    // old code
    public void Foo() { ... }
    }


    Foo is not a method of the IMobileFactory interface but it is added to NokiaFactory because there is another client who requires the method, and that client is happy to depend on NokiaFactory class. In other words, that client would welcome changes from NokiaFactory class, but the first client would not.







    share|improve this answer














    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer








    edited yesterday

























    answered yesterday









    Nghia Bui

    1,398811




    1,398811












    • I cant understand this part: "you want to add a new method to NokiaFactory and this method is not a part of the IMobileFactory interface, then client code will be affected unnecessarily". could you explain me this clearly?
      – O. Shekriladze
      yesterday












    • Yes, edited my answer.
      – Nghia Bui
      yesterday


















    • I cant understand this part: "you want to add a new method to NokiaFactory and this method is not a part of the IMobileFactory interface, then client code will be affected unnecessarily". could you explain me this clearly?
      – O. Shekriladze
      yesterday












    • Yes, edited my answer.
      – Nghia Bui
      yesterday
















    I cant understand this part: "you want to add a new method to NokiaFactory and this method is not a part of the IMobileFactory interface, then client code will be affected unnecessarily". could you explain me this clearly?
    – O. Shekriladze
    yesterday






    I cant understand this part: "you want to add a new method to NokiaFactory and this method is not a part of the IMobileFactory interface, then client code will be affected unnecessarily". could you explain me this clearly?
    – O. Shekriladze
    yesterday














    Yes, edited my answer.
    – Nghia Bui
    yesterday




    Yes, edited my answer.
    – Nghia Bui
    yesterday












    up vote
    2
    down vote













    You need the interface to avoid creating different flow per type, for 10 types you will have 1 lines of code instead of 10



    IMobileFactory factory = loadFactory(myFactoryName);


    instead of per type:



    NokiaFactory factory = new NokiaFactory();
    ...
    IphoneFactory factory = new IphoneFactory();
    ...


    The difference between using loadFactory method to new NokiaFactory() is that you don't need to explicitly create a new object, you delegate object creation to loadFactory which returns relevant object






    share|improve this answer



























      up vote
      2
      down vote













      You need the interface to avoid creating different flow per type, for 10 types you will have 1 lines of code instead of 10



      IMobileFactory factory = loadFactory(myFactoryName);


      instead of per type:



      NokiaFactory factory = new NokiaFactory();
      ...
      IphoneFactory factory = new IphoneFactory();
      ...


      The difference between using loadFactory method to new NokiaFactory() is that you don't need to explicitly create a new object, you delegate object creation to loadFactory which returns relevant object






      share|improve this answer

























        up vote
        2
        down vote










        up vote
        2
        down vote









        You need the interface to avoid creating different flow per type, for 10 types you will have 1 lines of code instead of 10



        IMobileFactory factory = loadFactory(myFactoryName);


        instead of per type:



        NokiaFactory factory = new NokiaFactory();
        ...
        IphoneFactory factory = new IphoneFactory();
        ...


        The difference between using loadFactory method to new NokiaFactory() is that you don't need to explicitly create a new object, you delegate object creation to loadFactory which returns relevant object






        share|improve this answer














        You need the interface to avoid creating different flow per type, for 10 types you will have 1 lines of code instead of 10



        IMobileFactory factory = loadFactory(myFactoryName);


        instead of per type:



        NokiaFactory factory = new NokiaFactory();
        ...
        IphoneFactory factory = new IphoneFactory();
        ...


        The difference between using loadFactory method to new NokiaFactory() is that you don't need to explicitly create a new object, you delegate object creation to loadFactory which returns relevant object







        share|improve this answer














        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer








        edited yesterday

























        answered yesterday









        user7294900

        18.2k93056




        18.2k93056






















            up vote
            0
            down vote













            From the design perspective:




            • Use SimpleFactory when the types of Objects are not fixed. For example: Phones my manufacturer - Nokia, iPhone. May be you want to add a new manufacturer tomorrow.


            • Use Factory method when the types of Objects are fixed. For example: Phones by type - Landline and Mobile.



            Finally, it comes down to how you want to design your system. What you want to be extendable.






            share|improve this answer





















            • binpress.com/factory-design-pattern/… according to this article it's vice-versa
              – O. Shekriladze
              yesterday












            • As I understand the post, it says the same thing I mentioned here. Use Factory method for Toys by location and use SimpleFactory for Toys by type.
              – Dakshinamurthy Karra
              yesterday















            up vote
            0
            down vote













            From the design perspective:




            • Use SimpleFactory when the types of Objects are not fixed. For example: Phones my manufacturer - Nokia, iPhone. May be you want to add a new manufacturer tomorrow.


            • Use Factory method when the types of Objects are fixed. For example: Phones by type - Landline and Mobile.



            Finally, it comes down to how you want to design your system. What you want to be extendable.






            share|improve this answer





















            • binpress.com/factory-design-pattern/… according to this article it's vice-versa
              – O. Shekriladze
              yesterday












            • As I understand the post, it says the same thing I mentioned here. Use Factory method for Toys by location and use SimpleFactory for Toys by type.
              – Dakshinamurthy Karra
              yesterday













            up vote
            0
            down vote










            up vote
            0
            down vote









            From the design perspective:




            • Use SimpleFactory when the types of Objects are not fixed. For example: Phones my manufacturer - Nokia, iPhone. May be you want to add a new manufacturer tomorrow.


            • Use Factory method when the types of Objects are fixed. For example: Phones by type - Landline and Mobile.



            Finally, it comes down to how you want to design your system. What you want to be extendable.






            share|improve this answer












            From the design perspective:




            • Use SimpleFactory when the types of Objects are not fixed. For example: Phones my manufacturer - Nokia, iPhone. May be you want to add a new manufacturer tomorrow.


            • Use Factory method when the types of Objects are fixed. For example: Phones by type - Landline and Mobile.



            Finally, it comes down to how you want to design your system. What you want to be extendable.







            share|improve this answer












            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer










            answered yesterday









            Dakshinamurthy Karra

            4,0331921




            4,0331921












            • binpress.com/factory-design-pattern/… according to this article it's vice-versa
              – O. Shekriladze
              yesterday












            • As I understand the post, it says the same thing I mentioned here. Use Factory method for Toys by location and use SimpleFactory for Toys by type.
              – Dakshinamurthy Karra
              yesterday


















            • binpress.com/factory-design-pattern/… according to this article it's vice-versa
              – O. Shekriladze
              yesterday












            • As I understand the post, it says the same thing I mentioned here. Use Factory method for Toys by location and use SimpleFactory for Toys by type.
              – Dakshinamurthy Karra
              yesterday
















            binpress.com/factory-design-pattern/… according to this article it's vice-versa
            – O. Shekriladze
            yesterday






            binpress.com/factory-design-pattern/… according to this article it's vice-versa
            – O. Shekriladze
            yesterday














            As I understand the post, it says the same thing I mentioned here. Use Factory method for Toys by location and use SimpleFactory for Toys by type.
            – Dakshinamurthy Karra
            yesterday




            As I understand the post, it says the same thing I mentioned here. Use Factory method for Toys by location and use SimpleFactory for Toys by type.
            – Dakshinamurthy Karra
            yesterday


















             

            draft saved


            draft discarded



















































             


            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53372254%2fsimple-factory-vs-factory-method%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            Wiesbaden

            Marschland

            Dieringhausen