Well if I really have to, I would use this. Swift compiler supports some attributes on getters, so you can use @available(*, unavailable): public subscript(index: Int) -> T { @available(*, unavailable) get { fatalError(“You cannot read from this object.”) } set(v) { } } This will clearly deliver your intention to the code users.
Using Proxies, you can get the desired behavior: var _arr = [‘one’, ‘two’, ‘three’]; var accessCount = 0; function doSomething() { accessCount++; } var arr = new Proxy(_arr, { get: function(target, name) { doSomething(); return target[name]; } }); function print(value) { document.querySelector(‘pre’).textContent += value + ‘\n’; } print(accessCount); // 0 print(arr[0]); // ‘one’ print(arr[1]); // … Read more
Annotating getters doesn’t mean that validation is performed when a getter is invoked. It is just used to identify the property to which a constraint shall apply. The big advantage of putting constraints on (usually public) getters instead on (typically private) fields is that the constraints are part of the type’s public API that way. … Read more
I personally don’t use getters and setters whenever it’s possible (meaning : I don’t use any framework who needs it, like Struts for instance). I prefer writing immutable objects (public final fields) when possible, otherwise I just use public fields : less boiler plate code, more productivity, less side effects. The original justification for get/set … Read more
I don’t see why an interface can’t define getters and setters. For instance, List.size() is effectively a getter. The interface must define the behaviour rather than the implementation though – it can’t say how you’ll handle the state, but it can insist that you can get it and set it. Collection interfaces are all about … Read more
What do you want to do with your custom setter? If you want the class to do something before/after the value is set, you can use willSet/didSet: class TheSuperClass { var aVar = 0 } class SubClass: TheSuperClass { override var aVar: Int { willSet { print(“WillSet aVar to \(newValue) from \(aVar)”) } didSet { … Read more
Quote from JEP 359: It is not a goal to declare “war on boilerplate”; in particular, it is not a goal to address the problems of mutable classes using the JavaBean naming conventions. My understanding, based on the same document is that records are transparent holders for shallowly immutable data. That being said: Records are … Read more
Set and Get methods are a pattern of data encapsulation. Instead of accessing class member variables directly, you define get methods to access these variables, and set methods to modify them. By encapsulating them in this manner, you have control over the public interface, should you need to change the inner workings of the class … Read more
I don’t have a problem with Holub telling you that you should generally avoid altering the state of an object but instead resort to integrated methods (execution of behaviors) to achieve this end. As Corletk points out, there is wisdom in thinking long and hard about the highest level of abstraction and not just programming … Read more
newContact.AssertWasCalled(x => { var dummy = x.Forenames; }, options => options.Repeat.AtLeastOnce()); Repeat.Any does not work with AssertWasCalled because 0 counts as any… so if it WASN’T called, the AsserWasCalled would return TRUE even if it wasn’t called.