 |
lua-l archive |
|
|
||
|
On 30/12/2010 08:45, steve donovan wrote:
On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 9:20 AM, Dirk Laurie<dpl@sun.ac.za> wrote:Just why must x and y be private if you plan to provide read and write access to them?Having had this moment with some Java[2] I was charged with sorting out, I must agree. The classic answer is that a.x confuses implementation with access, but _if_ a.x needs to invoke some code at some later date, well then there's always the property pattern.[1] [2] in any case with Java the IDEs are so good that you can find all the references to a field and correct them very quickly. Technology should trump ideology.
Well, it is harder and more annoying when that's a library that changes that: it means changing all the projects depending on it. Even on a closed project, management can frown upon making a change list of hundred of files just replacing variable access with a getter or setter.
Scala (to remain in the JVM realm) resolved that quite elegantly: just leave the variables in the open, and should you add code around access (get or set), you can do it without disturbing calling code.
That's indeed a point that a modern language should address elegantly. -- Philippe Lhoste -- (near) Paris -- France -- http://Phi.Lho.free.fr -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --