Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
"Alaric B. Snell" <alaric@a...> writes: > On Wednesday 23 October 2002 13:35, Simon St.Laurent wrote: > > > Interesting perspective. While I do occasionally tweak > > public/protected/private for performance reasons, especially in J2ME, my > > days spent in XML have made it very hard for me to consider making > > anything private, and even protected requires some thought. > > One argument for privatising every field in Java is that if you then > laboriously write pairs of get... and set... methods for each field then you > can (later) put in consistency checks for valid field values, automatic > updating of indices, security checks, etc. by modifying or overriding those > get/set variables. > > Ideally, of course, one would have a language where foo.bar = baz is just a > shorthand for foo.setBar (baz) and foo.bar is short for foo.getBar (), like > my beloved Dylan, since then you can declare fields public or public-read > private-write as you see fit and still add behaviour later. Or remove the > actual field storage altogether and replace it with a computation. I believe that's it's done in VB. Ari.
|
