Re: accessor generation???
Re: accessor generation???
- Subject: Re: accessor generation???
- From: Andy Lee <email@hidden>
- Date: Sat, 6 Jul 2002 10:28:10 -0400
At 8:40 AM -0400 7/6/02, Erik J. Barzeski wrote:
> On Friday, July 5, 2002, at 07:52 AM, Ondra Cada wrote:
I feel it somewhat strange: does that mean my programming style differs
so
>> much from the one of majority of others?
It may not be a matter of style so much as the classes of problems
you've worked on. It sounds like those problems were not candidates
for accessor-heavy classes, and you knew better than to add accessors
willy-nilly without a specific design motivation.
Frankly, I think anyone who picks a side is wrong.
On this, I agree with Erik. Is that picking a side? ;)
Say I've got Person.h/m. Guess what? Pretty accessor-heavy. Persons are
objects - they're models of real-world people (at least in this example).
But the controller? Pretty functionality-heavy. Because it controls the flow
and functionality of the program.
In other words, accessor-heavy classes are fine. In fact, I'd argue that
that's what most of the model classes should be (and when I say model I mean
MVC model, not "ideal" model).
I've done database projects where many classes were merely wrappers
for Model data, and accessor methods could reasonably be
auto-generated from, say, database schemas. I've also done more
algorithmic projects where there was hardly any call for get/set
methods.
--Andy
_______________________________________________
cocoa-dev mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives:
http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/cocoa-dev
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.