On Jul 30, 2013, at 11:25 AM, Scott Ribe <scott_r...@elevated-dev.com> wrote:
> On Jul 30, 2013, at 9:08 AM, Andy Lee <ag...@mac.com> wrote:
> 
>> I think it's subject to the same criticisms as *any* direct access to ivars, 
>> although I agree it feels sketchier when done in plain C for some reason.
> 
> Yes. Because what is the point of plain C functions in Objective-C files? 
> Local helpers that are not OOP, and do not go through method dispatch 
> overhead. To turn around and inject direct access to ivars in those is really 
> mixing metaphors.

One reason people might directly access ivars applies to methods as well as 
functions: the class may not have a getter method for that ivar.  Now, there is 
a school of thought that says ivars should *always* be accessed via a getter 
method, except in init and dealloc, and if necessary a "private" getter should 
be added.  If one does not subscribe to that school of thought, and accesses 
ivars directly in methods, I personally don't think it's a *huge* deal to do so 
in functions, especially since the function has to be inside the 
@implementation section and it won't be a commonplace thing.  But as always, 
I'm happy to code to the accepted norms of whatever team I'm on.

>> Which reminds me... instance methods can also directly access the ivars of 
>> *other* instances of the same class.
> 
> Now, *that* I knew. I'm sorry senator, I cannot recall if I ever did such a 
> thing. But I knew it was possible ;-)

So noted, and we thank you for your testimony today. :)

--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:
https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/cocoa-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

This email sent to arch...@mail-archive.com

Reply via email to