> I think the problem is a matter of semantics... I believe
> that by accessor
> methods we simply mean a method that gets or set another
> objects properties.
> By contrast, a method that returns data that is not private
> to an object is
> *not* classified as an accessor method. I do not know if this
> is a universal
> truth but it certainly seems to be the definition for this
> thread at least.
yup, it is a matter of semantics & I do get the point. this whole
thing got started when I was trying to reconcile what I read in the
article, with what I felt I knew. I was having definite problems with
that. but what you & Irv are saying is in fact exactly what I do all
the timne in my objects & behaviors. frankly after reading that
article I became quite convinced that what I was doing was in some way
"wrong." and in fact based on Jakob's response this AM I might say
that there may still be some confusion out there. <grin>
thanks for your comments Colin
Al Hospers
CamberSoft, Inc.
al<at>cambersoft<dot>com
http://www.cambersoft.com
Shockwave and Director development, Lingo programming, CGI scripting.
A famous linguist once said:
"There is no language wherein a double
positive can form a negative."
YEAH, RIGHT
[To remove yourself from this list, or to change to digest mode, go to
http://www.penworks.com/LUJ/lingo-l.cgi To post messages to the list,
email [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Problems, email [EMAIL PROTECTED])
Lingo-L is for learning and helping with programming Lingo. Thanks!]
