--000e0cd1e85cf2d155046d6beec2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

> Oh, I'm not sure if we crossed threads at some point, but I was
> suggesting using that approach *only* for DSLs.
> So we are totally in agreement.

alright then! my bad...
I thought you meant this to be generally an alternative to the traditional
setters.

Greetz!
k

2009/6/28 Gregory Brown <gregory.t.brown / gmail.com>

> On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 9:01 AM, Fabian
> Streitel<karottenreibe / googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> > But for any normal class that does not provide DSL semantics, I'd still
> go
> > with normal
> > getters and setters. I just don't see the point of reducing the amount of
> my
> > typing by
> > a single when on the other hand I have to either construct a whole
> array
> > each time
> > or introduce a new neutral element.
> >
> > To mee that just doesn't feel right, I guess...
>
> Oh, I'm not sure if we crossed threads at some point, but I was
> suggesting using that approach *only* for DSLs.
> So we are totally in agreement.
>
> -greg
>
>

--000e0cd1e85cf2d155046d6beec2--