Constructors are the same as methods in this respect – if you don’t give an explicit public, private or protected then the constructor gets the default “package private” visibility. It can be called from within the same class or from any other class in the same package, but not from subclasses in a different package … Read more
There’s a certain amount of misinformation here: “The default access modifier is not private but internal” Well, that depends on what you’re talking about. For members of a type, it’s private. For top-level types themselves, it’s internal. “Private is only the default for methods on a type” No, it’s the default for all members of … Read more
Java doesn’t let you make the access modifier more restrictive, because that would violate the rule that a subclass instance should be useable in place of a superclass instance. But when it comes to making the access less restrictive… well, perhaps the superclass was written by a different person, and they didn’t anticipate the way … Read more
You can use the x:FieldModifier attribute on your controls, thusly: <TextBox x:Name=”textBox1″ x:FieldModifier=”private” /> Interestingly the MSDN page for x:FieldModifier doesn’t give “private” as a valid value for the attribute, but I’ve tested it and it works.
It’s not possible in C#. Just for the sake of completeness, this is supported in IL (family and assembly access modifier).
Your Composite class is not public. You can’t return a non-public type from a public method. If you don’t specify an accessibility for a non-nested class then internal is used by default. Add public to your Composite class definition: public class Composite { … Alternatively, if buildComposite doesn’t need to be public (meaning it’s only … Read more
It works, but only you the children tries to access it own variable, not variable of other instance ( even if it belongs to the same inheritance tree ). See this sample code to understand it better: //in Parent.java package parentpackage; public class Parent { protected String parentVariable = “whatever”;// define protected variable } // … Read more
Yes, protected members can be accessed from the class itself, subclasses of the class and also all classes in the same package of the class (doesn’t matter if those are subclasses or not). If you didn’t know that last part before, then you’ve just learned something new. It simply means that you can use those … Read more
There is not a general agreement about that question. For example it was one of the open questions about MVVM formulated by Ward Bell here: Is the VM allowed to offer the V an unwrapped M-object (e.g., the raw Employee) ? Or must the M-object’s properties (if it is even permitted to have properties!) be … Read more
This is legal C++, §11.6/1 says: Access is checked at the call point using the type of the expression used to denote the object for which the member function is called (B* in the example above). The access of the member function in the class in which it was defined (D in the example above) … Read more