Steven Brownlee wrote:
Yes, that would work... however the idea of having a combined [hybridized] getter/setter just isn't sitting right with me and really that is what I just trying to voice. I just like having a getter method and a setter method - plain and straight-forward in their duties. I also like having "more" control in regards to the things I mentioned in my previous post. I am really not trying to argue about this and in the end as long it works - it's "ok" in my book. FYI, explicitly calling what the method does (getThis or setThis) with a verb is what works in my brain. It's just semantics to me and in the end, I'm the one who has to look at my code. Just my preference and I'm stickin' to it ;-) Best, .Peter -- Peter J. Farrell :: Maestro Publishing blog :: http://blog.maestropublishing.com email :: [EMAIL PROTECTED] phone :: 651-204-0513 There are 6 billion people on this planet.....and I like 8 of them. ------------------------------------------------------------ You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, send an email to [email protected] with the words 'unsubscribe cfcdev' as the subject of the email. CFCDev is run by CFCZone (www.cfczone.org) and supported by CFXHosting (www.cfxhosting.com). An archive of the CFCDev list is available at www.mail-archive.com/[email protected] |
- Re: [CFCDev] cfc check Peter J. Farrell
- RE: [CFCDev] cfc check Steven Brownlee
- Re: [CFCDev] cfc check Mike Kear
- Re: [CFCDev] cfc check Bill Rawlinson
- Re: [CFCDev] cfc check Mike Kear
- Re: [CFCDev] cfc check Bill Rawlinson
- Re: [CFCDev] cfc check Sean Corfield
- RE: [CFCDev] cfc check Nando
- Re: [CFCDev] cfc check Sean Corfield
- RE: [CFCDev] cfc check Paul
