in reply to Closure objects with public, private, and protected fields

Many of the replies in this thread are based around the notion that if developers willfully engages in bad practices, then it is on their heads. This is fine when you don't have to deal with the consequences. I'm currently on a project where a developer keeps wanting to access the object hashes references directly. I keep explaining that this is bad practice, but he doesn't get it.

I ride his ass at code reviews, but I really don't have any authority to do more than that, and as we're all contractors, there is no one lead developer. Now you could argue that the problem is due to the project team structure, but I would argue that it also relates to the fact that blessed hash references are used to store the object attributes. Sure, any developer who violates the public/private contract is asking for trouble, but the fact is we all suffer if things start to go wrong.

  • Comment on Re: Closure objects with public, private, and protected fields

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Closure objects with public, private, and protected fields
by adrianh (Chancellor) on Mar 11, 2006 at 11:27 UTC
    I'm currently on a project where a developer keeps wanting to access the object hashes references directly. I keep explaining that this is bad practice, but he doesn't get it.

    The problem with people like this is that they'll do other dumb things even if you don't allow them direct access to the hash. If they don't understand why it's a bad idea then they'll just find another "bad" way of solving the problem in my experience.