On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 07:09:42 +1000, Andrew Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If its bad why do MM allow it to be used, why do macromedia allow for these > problems?
In 6.0, you had no choice - there was no private scope. For other languages, public data has always been an option for developers but has also always been considered bad practice for the most part. > Anyway I guess what I am saying is that from a developers point of view, if > the concept is bad then why put it there in the first place? Go ask the designers of C++ and Java and C# which all have public data members. They'll probably answer with something about efficiency / performance. But they'll also say that encapsulation is more important (maintainability is more important than low-level performance in most situations). > But to just turn around and say its bad and don't use it, means nothing to > most who don't understand why it is there in the first place. Maybe a bit > more documentation and clearly explain why you shouldn't use it and when it > is safe to use it would be better. There is a wealth of OO documentation out there that explains why public data members are in general a bad idea. As Mark and I have said, you can't really learn OO from CF alone - you need to go out and study Java at least. And the information about practices like public / private data members are there in all of the Java material... --- You are currently subscribed to cfaussie as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Aussie Macromedia Developers: http://lists.daemon.com.au/
