|
|
Posted by Jerry Stuckle on 09/29/23 11:51
Tony Marston wrote:
> "Jerry Stuckle" <jstucklex@attglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:IrOdnQkOaac8Gz3ZnZ2dnUVZ_omdnZ2d@comcast.com...
>
>>Henk Verhoeven wrote:
>>
>>>Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>>> > Actually, things like private declarations are very important.
>>>
>>>IMHO private declarations are too rigid and therfore decrease
>>>reusability. I agree that it can be very usefull to know the intentions
>>>of the developer of some code one is evaluating to call or some member
>>>variable one is avaluating to access. But every now and then there are
>>>good reasons to do it anyway, even if it was intended to be private. For
>>>example lazy initialization and default reasoning both are often
>>>implemented using direct access to member variables. Another example is
>>>using a visitor to implement persistency.
>>>
>>>Now maybe you would say that i should change these member variables to
>>>protected or public. There are two problems with this:
>>>1. It may not be my own code. Then if i get an upgrade of this code,
>>>these member variables will once again be private, unless i re-apply my
>>>changes. This is uneccessary overhead.
>>>2. By changing the private declaration the intension of the other
>>>developer gets lost. Now i could put a comment in that it was intended to
>>>be private, but in that case: why not put the @private marker in the
>>>comment in the first place?
>>>
>>>The fundamental point is: With these private and protected declarations
>>>you get stuck with the uneccessarily limitations introduced by the
>>>author. Object-orientation can lead to more reusability then conventional
>>>parameterized code exactly because the code can be overridden and
>>>extended in ways the original author did not provide for. private and
>>>protected declarations are a step backwards that is only reasonable if
>>>you assume that future developers that will maintain or reuse your code
>>>will ignore your intentions becuase they are fools. If this is the case,
>>>i think you should tell your boss that you are limiting the reusability
>>>of your code because you are aniticipating him to hire fools and let them
>>>work on/with your code ;-)
>>>
>>>Greetings,
>>>
>>>Henk Verhoeven,
>>>www.phpPeanuts.org.
>>
>>Henk,
>>
>>Private declarations are key to OO programming.
>
>
> No they are not. Encapsulation is not the same as data hiding. Please refer
> to:
> http://www.javaworld.com/javaworld/jw-05-2001/jw-0518-encapsulation.html
> http://www.itmweb.com/essay550.htm
>
Give it up, Tony. You obviously can't even understand the information you
reference.
--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|