Thanks a lot for your feedback! I'm glad that you liked my work!

Thank you! I'm glad that you like it!

Hi! Thank you for the idea. I'll consider it when Apple makes the fees more reasonable.

Hi all!

We are actually very close to releasing the Korean 1.0 release. At this stage, I would be glad to get some early feedback from real users. If you have a few hours of spare time to participate in the beta review, please send me an email to support@refactoring.guru and I'll send you the detailed instruction on how to proceed.

Радий, що вам сподобалось, Вадиме!

Hi Daniel!

Thank you for asking!

1. Yes, I think it indeed violates SRP because both of these features can be implemented independently (at least, in many OOP languages).

2. Practically speaking, I personally don't care that much about following SRP. To me, SRP is just one of the indicators of the design. Still, as an author, I can't ignore this issue completely because I'd get backfire from the opposite camp. In any case, if I could do my thing efficiently while violating SRP, I would definitely do it. If it bites me in the future, I will refactor it away.

BTW, if anyone reading this topic wants to add something to the discussion, you're very welcome!

Thank you for your feedback!

Hi!

Sorry for the late reply. Maybe eventually I'll add C++ support, but it'll most likely happen in the far future.

The examples are currently in production. The current version is available at https://github.com/RefactoringGuru/design-patterns-dart

Hi!

If applicable, most of the patterns described in my book would contain one of the SOLID principles in the Pros & Cons section. At the same time, it was not my goal to view each pattern through the prism of SOLID. I only pointed out the most obvious features that stand out. I believe there might be no clear answer to your question. The patterns and the SOLID principles had been invented independently. But with a good understanding of the SOLID principles, you would be able to answer both questions—why some of the principles are relevant to a pattern, and why the rest aren't.