On Sat, 12 Oct 2002, Larry Wall wrote:
> On Sat, 5 Oct 2002, John Williams wrote:
> : Personally, I hope they look like attributes.
>
> They will, outside the class anyway. Inside it's $.foo.
>
> : But if they do, the perl5
> : lvalue subs are not the way to do it. Why? Because an lvalue sub re
On Sat, 5 Oct 2002, John Williams wrote:
: I think everyone agrees that some sort of simple accessor syntax will be
: included (instead of the getX/setX hack). But will accessors _look_ like
: attributes or methods?
:
: # look like methods
: object.foo($value);
:
: # look like attri
On Sunday, October 6, 2002, at 12:57 AM, Noah White wrote:
>>
>>> Note that an alternate definition of "private" is often used, as
>>> follows:
>>>
>>> A "private" attribute is an attribute whose scope is restricted
>>> such that
>>> it may be accessed only within the class in which it
At 4:29 PM -0600 10/5/02, John Williams wrote:
>On Sat, 5 Oct 2002, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
>
>> Dan Sugalski wrote:
>> >
>> > There won't be any direct access to attributes outside class methods
>> > of the class that defines the attributes, unless Larry changes his
>> > mind in a big way. (A
>
>> Note that an alternate definition of "private" is often used, as
>> follows:
>>
>> A "private" attribute is an attribute whose scope is restricted such
>> that
>> it may be accessed only within the class in which it has been
>> declared,
>> OR WITHIN ANY CLASS THAT INHERITS
On Friday, October 4, 2002, at 07:39 PM, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
[SNIP]
> Definition: "private":
>
> A "private" attribute is an attribute whose scope is restricted such
> that
> it may be accessed only within the class in which it has been
> declared.
> It is not available
John Williams:
# Personally, I hope they look like attributes. But if they
# do, the perl5
# lvalue subs are not the way to do it. Why? Because an
# lvalue sub returns
# a lvalue which get set _after_ the sub returns. At that
# point it is too
# late for the sub to do anything useful wit
On Sat, 5 Oct 2002, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
> Dan Sugalski wrote:
> >
> > There won't be any direct access to attributes outside class methods
> > of the class that defines the attributes, unless Larry changes his
> > mind in a big way. (And, honestly, probably not even then) Instead
> > it'll al
At 12:53 PM -0700 10/5/02, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
>Dan Sugalski wrote:
>>
>> There won't be any direct access to attributes outside class methods
>> of the class that defines the attributes, unless Larry changes his
>> mind in a big way. (And, honestly, probably not even then) Instead
>> it'll
Dan Sugalski wrote:
>
> There won't be any direct access to attributes outside class methods
> of the class that defines the attributes, unless Larry changes his
> mind in a big way. (And, honestly, probably not even then) Instead
> it'll all be accessed via lvalue methods. If an attribute is exp
At 4:39 PM -0700 10/4/02, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
>Under the principle of TMTOWTDI, perl allows public attributes
>within a class. However, you must explicitly declare an attribute
>to be public.
There won't be any direct access to attributes outside class methods
of the class that defines the
This all looks good to me. I seem to have gone off on a tangent about
slots, so I've mercifally changed the subject.
On Fri, Oct 04, 2002 at 04:39:40PM -0700, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
> [CONS]
>
> - Making publicly accessible attributes at all is considered Bad Form
> in most OO methodologies (
12 matches
Mail list logo
