----- Original message -----
> On Thu, 16 Dec 2010, Frederik wrote:
>
> > On 12/15/2010 09:50 PM, Tom Willemsen wrote:
> > > Yes, when you're using automatic properties (sorry I don't actually
> > > know what you call them, but this is what they're called in C#) the
> > > compiler will define _foo for you, you don't need to do it yourself
> >
> > This is what happens, but I don't think that the programmer should be
> > allowed to access this implicit variable directly (in C# you can't,
> > afaik). So it's better not to depend on it and consider it a bug
> > instead.
> Perhaps it shouldn't use the _<variablename> convention of naming the
> private storage variables. Maybe it should use a numbering system (which
> would make the C code hideous, I'm sure, but that way it's anyone's
> guess what the variable name would be. Or hash it or something?
>
But it doesn't make the code originally quoted any more desirable. Either you
use the convenient form or you don't. Mixing the two certainly wont add clarity
to the code and if the intention is to have a private _foo which doesn't relate
to the public property foo you've got a different problem anyway.
_______________________________________________
vala-list mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/vala-list
