> My argument is that having getters and setters exposes your implementation. If you have "getFoo" and "setFoo" it exposes that your class contains a value call

> My argument is that having getters and setters exposes your implementation. If you have "getFoo" and "setFoo" it exposes that your class contains a value called Foo. My argument is that you should either give your methods better names, or get rid of the pretense of encapsulation altogether and just make them public. Get/Set is just an awkward middle ground. this phrasing/perspective definitely brings me around more to your point.