> > If they're to be respected at all, private properties have to be weird
 > > and local.
 > 
 > I think we are all in agreement about that!

I'd like to agree, but I fear that -- in lieu of an existing public
property -- driver writers will simply add private properties for things
that ultimately end up becoming quite common.  We've already seen this
with jumbograms.

 > and in keeping with the "weird and local" spirit, I'm proposing
 > that their namespace be a little weird too - is there any objection
 > to requiring that names of private properties start with "_" (the 
 > underscore)?

That's OK by me.

-- 
meem

Reply via email to