From: framefritti <framefritti@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Protected Type compiler complaint
Date: Mon, 07 Jul 2014 14:06:53 -0500
Date: 2014-07-07T14:06:53-05:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Vsqdnahp47JQcifOnZ2dnUVZ_iydnZ2d@giganews.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: e17758fe-b230-4ef6-b144-d5a68e821915@googlegroups.com
In my humble and "gut" opinion, maybe in this case the use of a global object is not as bad as in other cases since by its own nature a protected object acts as a communication mean between different tasks, so it is "natural" that it must be visible to "everyone" (although you could partially restrict its visibility by placing it inside a suitable child package). Moreover, protected object have implicitly some kind of "high level" interface, so that its access is somehow controlled.
Riccardo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-07-07 19:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-07-07 7:15 Protected Type compiler complaint NiGHTS
2014-07-07 7:55 ` Simon Wright
2014-07-07 14:23 ` NiGHTS
2014-07-07 16:37 ` Adam Beneschan
2014-07-07 17:21 ` Simon Wright
2014-07-08 17:03 ` Shark8
2014-07-08 17:50 ` Anh Vo
2014-07-07 19:06 ` framefritti [this message]
2014-07-08 7:11 ` Georg Bauhaus
2014-07-08 7:53 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox