> -----Original Message----- > From: Peter Donald [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Not probably - definetly. We should make methods/variables as > private and > final as possible to make evolution easier. You can never > remove access once > something is released but you can always open up things later > if need be. This is fine for me, then no protected attributes at all must exist. FYI we have about 183 occurrences of 'protected' in the code. > Large number of subclasses or deep hierarchies are considered > harmful by some people ;) Abuse of anything is always harmful so that's not really an argument... > Much easier to evolve those tasks though and much easier to > maintain. In most > cases you can disregard the getters because very few of them > actually get > used anywhere and the setters are part of the Ant patterns so > I am not sure how you would propose to avoid them ? I was talking about the getters of course. Stephane. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
