From: "Andrew Brosnan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Just speaking generally about OO, I always figure it's dangerous to monkey with the object's underlying data structure. Might it change in the future? Who knows.
I agree with that if I'm acessing C::A's underlying data structure. What I'm getting at is why does C::A force its underlying data structure upon me? Shouldn't I be able to access $self any way I want? Shouldn't there be a way to prevent me from stepping on C::A's data structure without forcing me to use its "param" method to get access to $self? My whole point is that I don't want to make assumptions about C::A's data structure. I don't want to know anything about it. But, I think I should have access to $self without having to use C::A's "param" method (to store my own instance variables) just to avoid C::A's data structure. It seems like I have to know more about it than I want. Wouldn't the problem be solved if C::A's variables were prefixed in such a way that, as long as I don't use that prefix, I wouldn't have to bother myself with C::A's "param" method? (If that's the only point of "param"). Thanks, Mark --------------------------------------------------------------------- Web Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/cgiapp@lists.erlbaum.net/ http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=cgiapp&r=1&w=2 To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
