I'm not sure I understand the point of this. Am I just dense? Can someone explain in some detail?<p>To me this looks like a superfluous layer of indirection that causes you to have to manage your object method calls through an "interactor" instead of the object itself. That's just breaking the encapsulation pattern of OOP and I imagine this is nightmarish in terms of its impact on reusability of your code.<p>did I get it wrong or is this actually just a huge anti-pattern?
Pedantic question here: Which of the classic Gang of Four patterns does interactors fall into? Mediator?<p><a href="http://geekswithblogs.net/subodhnpushpak/archive/2009/09/18/the-23-gang-of-four-design-patterns-.-revisited.aspx" rel="nofollow">http://geekswithblogs.net/subodhnpushpak/archive/2009/09/18/...</a>
Once upon a time the Rails Brogrammers laughed at Java, where there was endless design pattern abuse and needless armchair architecture. Now the same has happened to Rails.<p>When you even think you might need to use Inter actors, it's time to roll onto a better and maybe newer platform, as it's downhill all way from now on.