[AccessD] Class Rebuttal was: Basic Unbound Form ...

I'd be interested in seeing this instance where an unprotected global
variable has to exist.

Josh

On 6/12/06, DWUTKA at marlow.com <DWUTKA at marlow.com> wrote:
> Well Lambert, I'm glad you didn't write the MSDN, because if I had to wade
> through this kind of logic to learn what I have, I would probably go back to
> being a mechanic.
>
> First of all, "But not as much of a waste of time as the process of
> explaining later on why public members fields have drawbacks.", they don't
> have drawbacks, they have limitations, which I explained.  I made it very
> obvious that a Public declaration is the same as a BASIC Get/Let statement.
> BASIC!!!!  You can't put logic into a Public declaration, but you can with a
> Get/Let statement, which would no longer be a 'BASIC' Get/Let statement.
>
> Next, "but globals are bad news in any context", not this again.  Public
> variables are not BUGGY, nor are they 'bad news'.  They have a purpose, that
> is why they are there in the first place.  The are things that you can do
> with a public variable that are simply nightmares to try and do without.  In
> the advanced demo, I will show a method of public declaration which I'd LOVE
> to see you duplicate in another manner.
>
> As far as data encapsulation, look, if you build every class to go far
> beyond what you need it for, you're wasting time.  I have a pretty flexible
> job, but even I don't over-program that much.  If all you need is a place
> holder for a value, then just put a place holder for the value.  Not a lot
> of lines, eh?  Let's look at that.

-- 
Josh McFarlane

"Peace cannot be kept by force. It can only be achieved by understanding."
-Albert Einstein