|
James, Your comments are very thought provoking. I hope you didn't read too much into the comment I made. Now its my turn. When you commented that "performance is never a non-issue" I got the impression that you totally disagree with what I said, but later you say "I use setter/getter methods where it makes sense". Which is it? In the case given, the performance implications of a getter and setter are outweighed by the overhead of creating the object in the first place. David Morris >>> jamesl@hb.quik.com 04/09/02 12:38PM >>> This is a multi-part message in MIME format... -- To: java400-l@midrange.com From: jamesl@hb.quik.com X-Advert: http://emumail.com Reply-To: jamesl@hb.quik.com Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2002 14:38:22 EDT X-Mailer: EMUmail Subject: Re: Java Style Question "David Morris" wrote: > I agree that performance is a non-issue Performance is never a non-issue, and it is because programmers who are either unwilling or unable to optimize treat performance as a non-issue that we're stuck in this insane spiral of bloatware guaranteed to need more processing power than the typical end-user has. I use setter/getter methods where it makes sense to do so. But not in situations where there's nothing to be gained from using them. -- J.Lampert
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.