flex-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kessler CTR Mark J <mark.kessler....@usmc.mil>
Subject RE: [Bindable] and private setters (was Re: [Falcon])
Date Mon, 28 Nov 2016 12:03:32 GMT
+1 for leaving the setter private.

-Mark

-----Original Message-----
From: Alex Harui [mailto:aharui@adobe.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2016 1:01 PM
To: dev@flex.apache.org
Subject: Re: [Bindable] and private setters (was Re: [Falcon])



On 11/22/16, 9:26 AM, "Josh Tynjala" <joshtynjala@gmail.com> wrote:

>If they make the getter public and the setter private, it's probably on
>purpose. If the compiler then forces the setter to be public for
>[Bindable], it should at least tell them that something probably
>unexpected
>is happening. I think a warning makes sense.

I don't think that [Bindable] has to force the setter to be public.

IMO, the right answer is to leave the setter as private and you'll get the
same errors as if you didn't use [Bindable] which is an error about
read-only if you don't use the private:: prefix.  That isn't completely
obvious, but at least is consistent.

Thoughts?
-Alex


Mime
View raw message