Worst rr cruft / development taxes
robert at ocallahan.org
Thu Jul 24 20:49:33 PDT 2014
On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 3:20 PM, Chris Jones <jones.chris.g at gmail.com>
> On Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 4:32 PM, Robert O'Callahan <robert at ocallahan.org>
>> * I know you like the pattern where a private member foo is accessed via
>> a getter method "foo_type& foo()" but I don't :-).
> When I want to trigger side effects on setting foo, I
> agree with a separate setter, but otherwise I don't like the extra
> boilerplate (part of that may be Java PTSD) and sometimes like to know that
> no side effects are involved.
The problem is that if at some future point you decide that side effects on
setting are needed after all, with "foo_type& foo()" you have to change the
API and modify client code. It's not better than just exposing the field
directly IMHO. I blame the PTSD :-).
oIo otoeololo oyooouo otohoaoto oaonoyooonoeo owohooo oioso oaonogoroyo
owoiotoho oao oboroootohoeoro oooro osoiosotoeoro owoiololo oboeo
osouobojoeocoto otooo ojouodogomoeonoto.o oAogoaoiono,o oaonoyooonoeo
osoaoyoso otooo oao oboroootohoeoro oooro osoiosotoeoro,o o‘oRoaocoao,o’o
oaonosowoeoroaoboloeo otooo otohoeo ocooouoroto.o oAonodo oaonoyooonoeo
osoaoyoso,o o‘oYooouo ofooooolo!o’o owoiololo oboeo oiono odoaonogoeoro
otohoeo ofoioroeo ooofo ohoeololo.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the rr-dev