2 ms·

I don't think it's clicked for you yet. And when you say this: "private" has a standardized meaning in pretty much all OOP languages don't you mean "in C++ a

I don't think it's clicked for you yet. And when you say this: "private" has a standardized meaning in pretty much all OOP languages don't you mean "in C++ and Java"? Because Ruby's private is significantly different.

trezor 18y ago
Ah well. I'll rephrase myself and say any OOP language I have any significant knowledge about then ;) But both C#, VB.Net and pretty much any OOP language I have touched has been like that. Granted I've seen different meanings for static and protected, but I've never seen this behaviour before. I'll simply admit my own ignorance, I guess.
- SwellJoe 18y ago
  When in doubt go to the source of the ideas, to see who got the labels wrong. C#, VB.Net, Java, and even C++ are nowhere near the source on OOP (and they are all in the same lineage...while JavaScript shares far more with Scheme and SmallTalk, and is thus on a quite different road). One should be careful about thinking "different" means "wrong".