Can manager classes be a sign of bad architecture?
- by Paul
Lately I've begun to think that having lots of manager classes in your design is a bad thing. The idea hasn't matured enough for me to make a compelling argument, but here's a few general points:
I found it's a lot harder for me to understand systems that rely heavily on "managers". This is because, in addition to the actual program components, you also have to understand how and why the manager is used.
Managers, a lot of the time, seem to be used to alleviate a problem with the design, like when the programmer couldn't find a way to make the program Just WorkTM and had to rely on manager classes to make everything operate correctly.
Of course, mangers can be good. An obvious example is an EventManager, one of my all time favorite constructs. :P My point is that managers seem to be overused a lot of the time, and for no good reason other than mask a problem with the program architecture.
Are manager classes really a sign of bad architecture?
