[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: OT: Save me from typing (was: XML as "passive data")

• To: "Jeff Lowery" <jlowery@s...>,"Seairth Jacobs" <seairth@s...>,"xml-dev" <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: Re: OT: Save me from typing (was: XML as "passive data")
• From: "Karl Waclawek" <karl@w...>
• Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 14:20:06 -0400
• Cc: "'Alaric B. Snell'" <alaric@a...>
• References: <D60D8F448216D611A21A00508B62B5BC5DD1@e...>

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jeff Lowery" <jlowery@s...>

> > And since this can be done in C++ too, the question now is:
> > Which languages (except C and Java) do *not* support the feature
> > described above (often called "properties")?
> 
> What I object to (no pun intended) is having to write all those stinkin'
> set/get methods.  Why can't I just write:
> 
> private, public int foo; // private data member, public
> accessors
> 
> which will (tacitly) generate:
> 
> int getFoo() { return foo;}
> void setFoo( int Foo ) { foo = Foo;}
> 
> with appropriate calls to super.get/set methods in cases of derived classes.
> Then, if I have too, I can override tacit methods by explicitely writing
> method bodies.

I think what you suggest should be done by the IDE not by the language definition.
It's just about saving keystrokes, if I understand you correctly.

Karl

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: OT: Save me from typing (was: XML as "passive data")
    • From: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>

• References:
  • OT: Save me from typing (was: XML as "passive data")
    • From: Jeff Lowery <jlowery@s...>

• Prev by Date: RE: OT: Save me from typing (was: XML as "passive data")
• Next by Date: Re: OT: Save me from typing (was: XML as "passive data")
• Previous by thread: OT: Save me from typing (was: XML as "passive data")
• Next by thread: Re: OT: Save me from typing (was: XML as "passive data")
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread