From: "David A. Black" <dblack@...>
Date: 2005-01-21T23:30:33+09:00
Subject: Re: Protected instance variables

Hi --

On Fri, 21 Jan 2005, trans. wrote:

> David wrote:
> So having them be [protected,private] (not sure which is
> the  right term) would mean you could make up your own
> instance variable names in class or module scope and not
> have to worry.
>
> Hmm... That certainly seems like a good idea. And then you'd use
> accessors to get at those on different levels.

If you want.  Or they may just be used to store state privately.

> But attribute names
> (i.e. method names for accessing those instance vars)  would still come
> into conflict, which partially of defeats the purpose. ?

That shouldn't be a problem, because if a module defines an accessor
method, that will be documented and if you're writing a class that
includes that module, you'll know not to override it unless you want
to (as with other methods).


David

-- 
David A. Black
dblack@wobblini.net