in reply to Re: Re^4: Private method variations
in thread Private method variations
Quite true, but do you not intend it to be viewed as "private" ala Java/C++ etc? In which case, the name may actually help to "enforce" your intentions even though the reality is actually different.
No I don't really want it to be viewed as the same as "private" in Java, C++ or whatever. I want it to be viewed as a solution to the sort of problem that is solved by "private" in those languages :-)
Since most Perl coders are used to using my and our to solve namespace issues with variables I think those would be more familiar terms.
The "private" concept in C++ conflates two separate issues:
- Preventing access to a method
- Describing the public interface of a class
I like being able to tease those different functions apart - it can sometimes be useful. For example I've seen C++ coders jump through some evil hoops to test their private methods (e.g. #define private public when compiling in the test framework - ewww! :-)
That said, the length is the main issue for me with using PRIVATE::. It's just too much typing.
|
---|
Replies are listed 'Best First'. | |
---|---|
Re: Re^6: Private method variations
by stvn (Monsignor) on Mar 02, 2004 at 01:05 UTC | |
by adrianh (Chancellor) on Mar 02, 2004 at 12:23 UTC |