On Friday, Sep 12, 2003, Sean Corfield wrote: > >On Friday, Sep 12, 2003, at 12:52 US/Pacific, Brad Howerter wrote: >> Yeah, sort of. I misspoke a little. I write my CFCs so that >> everything >> that's a CFPROPERTY is also in the 'self' structure (or else has >> a getProperty method). > >OK, by convention I assume, since CFPROPERTY doesn't 'do' anything...
Yes, by convention, but CFPROPERTY does at least set up the metdata the way I want it. > >> The get method just looks to see if the property being accessed has >> a getProperty() (i.e. getName) method for it and if it does, >> it returns it. >> >> Otherwise it just returns the self[property]. > >Interesting. And things don't get into 'self' unless that have a >CFPROPERTY tag... I see. Of course, I'm still going to argue that such >'blind' get/set methods break encapsulation because you might just as >well use 'this.propertyName' instead of 'self[propertyName]' and >cfproperty name='propertyName' and a get/set call... But at least >you're containing what the get/set methods can access! Holub would disagree, too, I would imagine. But it is more encapsulated than 'this' is, because the class can at any time override the get function with a getProperty function of its own and nothing breaks. *** The information in this email is confidential and intended solely for the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the sender by return e-mail, delete this email, and refrain from any disclosure or action based on the information. **** ---------------------------------------------------------- You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word 'unsubscribe cfcdev' in the message of the email. CFCDev is run by CFCZone (www.cfczone.org) and supported by Mindtool, Corporation (www.mindtool.com). An archive of the CFCDev list is available at www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
