Last-Aurora_Evaluation

school

---

# Hofbauer, Hofstetter

# Project-Structure

• Solution: LastAurora
  • LastAurora - Classes, Interfaces
  • LastAurora - Unit-tests
  • LastAuroraWeb - UI for convoy-management

---

# Interfaces

1. ICargo Interface

• Cohesion: High. Provides a method for describing cargo.
• Coupling: Low. Can be implemented by any class without dependencies on specific implementations.
• Strengths: Clear purpose and easy to extend with new cargo types.
• Improvements: None needed;

2. IDamageStrategy Interface

• Cohesion: High. It focuses solely on damage application and repair, maintaining a clear responsibility.
• Coupling: Low. Like ICargo, it’s an interface, allowing flexible implementation without tight coupling to other classes.
• Strengths: Allows different damage behaviors to be defined easily.
• Improvements: None needed;

3. IVehicle Interface

• Cohesion: High. It provides a clear purpose by requiring a price property for vehicles.
• Coupling: Low. It allows various vehicle types to implement the interface without depending on specific classes.
• Strengths: Flexibility in defining different vehicle types while ensuring they have a common attribute.
• Improvements: None needed;

---

# Classes

4. Addon Class

• Cohesion: Moderate to High. It has properties related to an add-on, but it could potentially be split into more specific add-on types.
• Coupling: Low.
• Strengths: Holds all necessary data for an add-on in one place.
• Improvements: None needed;

5. Crew Class

• Cohesion: High. It focuses on defining crew cargo and describing it.
• Coupling: Low. It only implements ICargo, keeping it loosely coupled to other classes.
• Strengths: Clear and straightforward, fulfilling its purpose effectively.
• Improvements: None needed;

6. Munition Class

• Cohesion: High. It’s dedicated to defining munition cargo with a clear method for description.
• Coupling: Low. It refers to the ICargo interface without additional dependencies.
• Strengths: Specific and well-defined functionality.
• Improvements: None needed;

7. ChemischeWaffen Class

• Cohesion: High. Focuses on chemical weapons, with a clear responsibility.
• Coupling: Low. Like other cargo classes, it implements ICargo, maintaining loose coupling.
• Strengths: Simple and effective in its design.
• Improvements: None needed;

8. Cargo Class

• Cohesion: High. It has properties and behavior of generic cargo.
• Coupling: Low. It implements ICargo without dependencies on other classes.
• Strengths: Flexible for general cargo use.
• Improvements: None needed;

9. KonvoiFacade Class

• Cohesion: Moderate. It handles various tasks related to managing a convoy, which could lead to multiple responsibilities.
• Coupling: Moderate. It relies on several vehicle types and their properties.
• Strengths: Centralized management of the convoy, making it easier for managing a convoy.
• Improvements: Maybe breaking down methods into smaller classes.

10. Slot Class

• Cohesion: High. It focuses on managing the state and cargo assignments of a slot.
• Coupling: Moderate. It relies on IDamageStrategy and ICargo.
• Strengths: Well-structured for handling cargo assignments and status changes.
• Improvements: Could provide additional methods for handling slot state transitions.

11. StandardDamageStrategy Class

• Cohesion: High. Focused on applying and repairing damage to slots.
• Coupling: Low. It doesn’t depend on any other classes except for the Slot type it operates on.
• Strengths: Implements the Strategy Pattern effectively for damage management.
• Improvements: None needed;

12. Trailer Class

• Cohesion: High. It represents a trailer and its properties, based on IVehicle.
• Coupling: Low. It’s a specific implementation that remains loosely coupled due to the interface.
• Strengths: Clear and focused on the trailer’s attributes.
• Improvements: None needed;

13. Truck Class

• Cohesion: High. It has truck-related properties while implementing IVehicle.
• Coupling: Low. Similar to the Trailer, it maintains loose coupling through the interface.
• Strengths: Clearly defines truck attributes and responsibilities.
• Improvements: None needed;

14. Upgrade Class

• Cohesion: Moderate. It combines functionality related to vehicles, slots, and add-ons, which gets more complex. Tasks need to be defined clearly.
• Coupling: Moderate. It interacts directly with Slot and Addon, which leads to tighter coupling.
• Strengths: Provides a mechanism for managing add-ons and slots effectively.
• Improvements: Consider breaking it down into smaller components or classes to focus on different responsibilities.

---

# Conclusion

Most interfaces, such as ICargo, IDamageStrategy, and IVehicle, have high cohesion with low coupling, allowing for clear responsibilities and flexible implementations. This design provides maintainability & reusability.

Classes like Crew, Munition, and ChemischeWaffen also have high cohesion, maintaining clear, focused functionalities. While the Addon class has moderate cohesion, it still is low coupled, which is effective. However, the KonvoiFacade and Upgrade classes could be improved to make them more focused and reduce their connections to other parts/classes.