getter-setter

Still relatively new to Java and I'm wondering which is the better way to handle this. I have a class constructor that takes a few parameters, and also in this class are public getters and setters: private String name; private Float value; public MySampleClass(String theName, Float theValue) { setName(theName); setValue(theValue); } public void setName(String n) { this.name = n; } public value setValue(Float v) { this.value = v; } I'd like to do some bounds checking on this Float. It seems like the best place to put it would be in the setter: public value setValue(Float v) { if (v < 0.0f) {

I'm working with XULRunner and came across the following pattern in a code sample: var StrangeSample = { backingStore : "", get foo() { return this.backingStore + " "; }, set foo(val) { this.backingStore = val; }, func: function(someParam) { return this.foo + someParam; } }; StrangeSample.foo = "rabbit"; alert(StrangeSample.func("bear")); This results in "rabbit bear" being alerted. I've never seen this get/set pattern used in Javascript before. It works, but I can't find any documentation/reference for it. Is this something peculiar to XUL, a recent language feature, or just something I

This question already has an answer here: Why use getters and setters/accessors? [closed] 38 answers I saw a code where getters and setters methods are declared private. I am trying to figure out the logic behind it, and I am really having hard time to understand why would you declare them as private? That's exactly opposite of what we are trying to achieve through getters and setters. I can think of several reasons: you want to prevent future public access. If a different programmer sees your code and wants access to a variable, but there are no setters and getters, he might think you just

Is it possible somehow to achieve this behavior in C#: public interface IReadOnly { Data Value { get; } } internal interface IWritable : IReadOnly { Data Value { get; set; } } I want to be able to expose a readonly interface to outside assemblies, but use a writable interface internally (which I could also implement in different ways). I know I can use an abstract class which implements IReadOnly but adds setters, but that forces me to derive all internal implementations from that class. This isn't a problem: public interface IReadOnly { Data Value { get; } } internal interface IWritable :

If I need to write a setter and/or getter for a property I write it like this: struct X { /*...*/}; class Foo { private: X x_; public: void set_x(X value) { x_ = value; } X get_x() { return x_; } }; However I have heard that this is the Java style of writing setters and getters and that I should write it in C++ style. Moreover I was told it is ineficient and even incorrect. What does that mean? How can I write the setters and getters in C++? Assume the need for getters and/or setters is justified . E.g. maybe we do some checks in the setter, or maybe we write only the getter. There are two

I know I can generate setters and getters for fields in the Eclipse source menu, but I'm very surprised it doesn't offer to replace the direct field accessors with calls to the newly created methods. Does anyone know how to do this short of manual search and replace? Thanks! There is a way. Focus on the attribute, right click. Select "Refactor" -> "Encapsulate Field". (Edited to explain why it works, even though the menu's title doesn't imply it) The "Encapsulate Field" dialog-box will create getters/setters for you if they don't exist, and will change field-access to go through the getters

I remember reading that in Doctrine 2 models, I should not set properties/fields public. How then would you expose these fields? The sandbox used get*() & set*() methods. Is that the best idea? Its very cumbersome. Using magic methods __get() __set() will make things similar to setting fields public? Whats your recommendation? Tim Lytle Here's why you can't use public properties: How can public fields “break lazy loading” in Doctrine 2? You are correct that __get() and __set() can make accessing the protected / private fields easier. Here's a simple example: public function __get($name) { if