On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 18:00:50 -0500, John D Farrar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > What would that be called "excapulation" vs "encapsulation". Actually you > could still write the internals to deal with that... it would just require a > little more features. But essentially you are wrong Pat.
Actually Pat is correct (and you are wrong). By exposing an attribute as a variable - even "readonly" using your scope reassignment hack - you are no longer able to change the implementation to get calculated-on-demand attribute values - getSomething() doesn't need a real attribute variable underneath it but your method does... which is why your method, although you find it useful, is not really a good idea. -- Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/ Team Fusebox -- http://www.fusebox.org/ Breeze Me! -- http://www.corfield.org/breezeme Got Gmail? -- I have 1 invite "If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive." -- Margaret Atwood ---------------------------------------------------------- You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the words '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 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
