> I think it really doesn't suck. You've just been lucky enough so far to be > able to ride around on synthesized setters, so an override feels bad. Get > over it already!
Just because I can now synthesize setters doesn't make it suck less. Over it or under it ;) The intend of this mail was not to bitch though, instead to see if there was something I have missed. Looks like I didn't... > The only part of a setter override that perhaps hurts (other than having to > type a few extra keystrokes) is that you lose access to the lightweight > implementation of the "atomic" attribute. It's easy to obsess about that > too, but the class of thread synchronization problems that atomicity > actually solves, compared to the class of synchronization problems that need > a higher-level strategy, is so small that it's not worth avoiding setters > only for this reason. While I agree that this is not a big deal in practice, I am sure you'd agree that it would be indeed nice if we could somehow call out to the synthesized setters. I don't have so deep insights into the Obj-C runtime but I was wondering if there is some magic one can pull off to get to the original setters. cheers, Torsten _______________________________________________ Cocoa-dev mailing list (Cocoa-dev@lists.apple.com) Please do not post admin requests or moderator comments to the list. Contact the moderators at cocoa-dev-admins(at)lists.apple.com Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/cocoa-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to arch...@mail-archive.com
