Anything placed in the variables scope is private; bug or not. Besides, salary could have been declared using either the variables scope or the unnamed scope with the same effect of it being a private instance variable.
Matt Liotta President & CEO Montara Software, Inc. http://www.montarasoftware.com/ V: 415-577-8070 F: 415-341-8906 P: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -----Original Message----- > From: Pete Freitag [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, September 02, 2002 3:05 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: RE: CFC theory > > Yes I know that that works, but strictly speaking salary is not private > when > it is in the variables scope, due to the bug. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Matt Liotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, September 02, 2002 5:32 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: RE: CFC theory > > > That is not true as I have already responded with the use of the > variables scope. The following does work. > > <cfset variables.salary = arguments.salary> > > Matt Liotta > President & CEO > Montara Software, Inc. > http://www.montarasoftware.com/ > V: 415-577-8070 > F: 415-341-8906 > P: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Pete Freitag [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Monday, September 02, 2002 2:35 PM > > To: CF-Talk > > Subject: RE: CFC theory > > > > >> 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/[email protected]/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
