There is no copyright on terms 'getter', 'setter' etc. For the first part I didn't like the article since it's somewhere between fp and oop, vague or foggy. Bu

There is no copyright on terms 'getter', 'setter' etc. For the first part I didn't like the article since it's somewhere between fp and oop, vague or foggy. But it's just my interpretation based/biased with previous knowledge. Once I assumed the article is conceptual and in harmony with it's definitions, everything got much more sense. I like it.