On Oct 3, 2011, at 2:23 PM, Charles Srstka wrote: > 2. KVO’s “access instance variables directly” (mis)feature recognizes the > underscore prefix. I like to give it a prefix that KVO doesn’t know about so > that I can be sure never to end up accidentally accessing the ivars of > another object without going through the proper accessors.
Ooh, hadn't thought of that. Maybe now's the time to start using spiffy compiler features like synthesized ivars, and to stop declaring ivars at all. On Oct 7, 2011, at 1:21 PM, Glenn L. Austin wrote: > The proper way (today) to mark an ivar as private is to use @private. Go > ahead and use a leading underscore, but don't be surprised if sometime in the > future you are debugging a strange compile-time error. (I've been 'bit' by > this a few times in my development). The reason I use an underscore for ivars has nothing to do with it marking it private (which I do anyway with @private). It's to be able to spot them more easily in my implementation code. If I get a compile-time error I can always rename the ivar. More dangerous is runtime errors due to a pseudo-private *method* name that you didn't realize overrides a method in a superclass. I confess I use the underscore prefix for "private" methods, but my private methods tend to be pretty non-generic. --Andy _______________________________________________ Cocoa-dev mailing list (Cocoa-dev@lists.apple.com) Please do not post admin requests or moderator comments to the list. Contact the moderators at cocoa-dev-admins(at)lists.apple.com Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/cocoa-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to arch...@mail-archive.com
