[828] in Coldmud discussion meeting

Re: protected and private object variables

daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Sun Oct 15 18:53:08 1995 )

Date: Sun, 15 Oct 1995 16:50:14 -0600
From: 869683 Gillespie Brandon James <brandon@smithfield.declab.usu.edu>
To: coldstuff@pippin.ece.usu.edu

< Maybe, maybe not, but from the way you explained it, the names are 
< totally wrong.

This depends upon what you are basing 'wrong' off of.

< They should be 'instance' and 'class' variables, or'child' and 'definer' 
< variables if you want to be obnoxiously classless.

The concept is the same, the name is an important detail, but there is
no _should_ or _shouldn't_, other than if I'm trying to emulate another
language, or what my desires are in creating this functionality.

I have intentionally shied away from using instance and class for a
few reasons, mainly that there ARE NOT instances and classes, and using
such names would be horribly misleading.

With this in mind, I decided 'private' was good, because it essentially
functions like the 'private' flag on a method (i.e. only if caller() is
definer() can it be executed).  'protected' just sortof fell into place
after that.         

Mind you, I like the suggestions, it was just the sternminded 'you are
doing it _wrong_' that I dont like.  Frankly, the way it is finally
implemented is the right way (period) even if it isn't like what others
do, because its how I've decided to do it, after considering all influences
I could.  Hmm, basically: I dont care if thats "how the Jones do it", its
all ones and zeros in the end ;)

I'll brainstorm names here.  First, we have variables which are restricted
to the defining object, and cannot be redefined on a descendant.  Then you
have the regular variables, which CAN be redefined.  The first name will
always be in reference to the !redefinable variables:

    definer (your suggestion)
    child (your suggestion)

    private (mine)
    protected (mine)

    limited
    regular

    restricted
    normal

    private
    normal

My mind is currently refusing to help me out, so if anybody else feels like
it, join in :b

I do believe I will add the functionality, I have not decided upon the
access 'names' yet though...  I prefer 'private' as its basically the
same concept as a private method, so it will be easier to transpose
to variables for beginners.  Dunno about the regular name though...

-Brandon