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

On 12 Jun 2006 at 16:16, Heenan, Lambert wrote:

> Sorry , can't agree with that either. Public variables are there so that
> code written for ancient systems, running languages that had only one kind
> of variable - public ones - can continue to be run. It's a backward
> compatibility feature. I know that may seem like a bold, overarching
> statement, but look at the history of programming languages. Why was the
> concept of 'local variables' dreamt up? Because having all global variables
> was a nightmare The fact that lots people (myself included!) have a tendency
> to cut corners and use them as a quick and dirty way to get data moving from
> one module to another does not mean that it's a good idea.  There's really
> no excuse for using a global, as rewriting the code to use local variables
> requires very little effort.
> 

I'm with Drew on this one. Just because you now have local variables, 
doesn't mean that there is no place for globals. Sure, "all global 
viariables was a nightmare" but we're not talking about "all global" here. 
There are a still situations where a global is the simplest and best 
solution.  Why limit yourself to only using some of the tools in you 
toolbag?
...
> it's based on the idea that a global, by its very
> nature can be modified from almost anywhere at all in code, and that  makes
> for a debug/maintenance problem.
> 

It's poor design that makes the problem there, not globals. The same can be 
said for any other alternative to a global such as Static Function, Class 
Property etc.

-- 
Stuart