Hi All - the documentation for the

ComponentResource

pattern never provides an example of subclassing a

ComponentResource

to specialise a more general abstraction. Is inheritance discouraged?

Composition is the normal pattern. Inheritance can be used, but it's just not as common.

Thanks @little-cartoon-10569 - I'd assumed as much, but figured there might have been a reason why it wasn't shown in the documentation. Is the usual compositional pattern to create a new more specialised type/component resource, and then have the new type simply carry the more general type within, assigned to one of the instance attributes?

Yes. Since you can't inherit from the cloud resources (what kind of a bucket is a kind-of S3 bucket?), and all you can do is configure them (a self-cleaning S3 bucket is an ordinary S3 bucket, with certain lifecycle rules applied.. it's not a subclass of an S3 bucket) or compose them (an auto-backed-up bucket is an S3 bucket with another S3 bucket and a lambda that copies any changes based on certain events), then composition is generally more suited. Plus, it's easier to grok when reading the code. Inheritance necessitates a lot of boilerplate, classes in other files, and related messiness.

Yep, makes sense. Thanks for your input @little-cartoon-10569 🙂