On 11/20/22 14:37, [] () {} () wrote:
> so, as I understand it, your're against the use of private, against the
> use of class, and against the use of encapsulation.
I never implied any of that.
> .. good luck with your career as a software engineer (but please, for
> all our sakes, don't work on any safety-related systems, and especially
> not the ones running in my car).
I haven't written any code that runs on the car yet but I did and still
do work in autonomous vehicle projects:
https://techcrunch.com/2017/04/04/daimler-and-bosch-fully-autonomous-cars-within-5-years/
(That partnership is no more at this time.)
And coincidentally, to reply to your post that included Autosar, MISRA,
etc. I am very well aware of those standards because I did contribute to
the team that wrote our coding standards by going through every single
one of their rules.
As one would expect, there was no argument on whether to use getters and
setters or direct public access for that project: We decided no public
access to members.
This discussion came to this point because you and I understood the
question differently: I took the OP's question literally: "Is defining
get/set methods for every field overkill?"
You took the question as whether to define them for class hierarchies,
safety-critical systems, etc.
Ali
