>> On Monday, September 2, 2002, at 01:54 , Hal Helms wrote:
>> I can't agree that this is the same as in Java. In Java, I can define an
>> instance variable as private and then set it to an identically named
>> argument passed into a method.
> Only if you explicitly qualify the instance variable with 'this.' so it
> doesn't clash with the argument name (remember that in Java, arguments are
> the unnamed scope - so you have exactly the same type of namespace clash!)
I think what Hal is getting at is that in Java you can do this:
private int x;
void foo(int x) {
this.x = x;
}
in C++ you can do this:
void foo(int x) {
this->x = x;
}
but there is no way to do that with CFC's.
I think the this scope was a poor name choice, I would expect the this
keyword to point to, or reference my object as it does in C++ or Java. I'm
not saying that CFC's should be exactly like Java or C++ classes, but it
would have led to less confusion if "this" was named "public" or something
else.
_____________________________________________
Pete Freitag
CTO, CFDEV.COM
ColdFusion Developer Resources
http://www.cfdev.com/
______________________________________________________________________
Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
