Re: (placepo) Properties

["Martin Krischik" <krischik@users.sourceforge.net>]

Am 02.12.2010, 00:24 Uhr, schrieb Georg Bauhaus  
<rm-host.bauhaus@maps.futureapps.de>:

> I don't see how "automatic" get/set subprograms offer
> software engineering advantage, even when they are terse
> and semi-implicit and purport to avoid repetitive clutter.

Actually they don't. Not if you can't replace the automated get/set with a  
user defined function. Especially for set this is important as set should  
check the value and notify observers of the change. I see far to many  
mutators which neglect this. And get should protect the value from outside  
changes by by either returning the value as constant or by coping the  
value. But especially in Java I often wonder why accessors and mutators  
are used at all.

For example in Scala where accessors and mutators are automaticly  
generated (without get and set prefix as Scala is functional [1]) this has  
come back to haunt the language as it becomes very complicated to create  
rich accessors and mutators.

Ok, one thing is left: properties can be overridden. For example a  
abstract property can be defined in an interface.

Martin

[1] Which makes me wonder: The set and get prefix are not needed in Ada or  
Java - so why not do without them?
-- 
Martin Krischik
mailto://krischik@users.sourceforge.net
https://sourceforge.net/users/krischik