From: Gennadiy Rozental (gennadiy.rozental_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-05-23 12:20:31
> > It's not more nor less safe as usual get/set scheme.
> Oh, one other point: the main reason for the "usual get/set scheme"
> isn't safety, per-se, but encapsulation. The interface can remain
> stable while the implementation changes so that there is no data
> member of the type being accessed. If your properties library doesn't
> have that property (I don't know whether it does or not), it isn't a
I don't think single interface/many implementation is main reason. In most
cases people just do not want public data members laying around. With this
design property became part of class interface.
Anyway it's completely different idiom and has nothing to do with this
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk