Re: Protected

> For fields, protected visibility (again, being the default one) should 
> allow field access to any method wich have the class in question as one 
> of its arguments...

Well, i don't like private fields, you know. It renders most libraries 
unsuitable for extending most of the time. But it seems too complicated 
to implement a distinction between protected and public fields in a 
multi-method language (it is possible to implement them, by checking 
whether the method accessing them overrides another method, which in 
turn had access to them). Still, we can keep a distiction between public 
and protected fields if only to choose which one to include in a 
generated documentation. I want, also, protected fields not to generate 
public "Java-compatible" getters and setters.


-------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference & EXPO
September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices
Agile & Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects & Teams * Testing & QA
Security * Process Improvement & Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf