2 ms·
> If your fingers protest at the additional "get" in your function names, go and buy yourself a real IDE. If you can't see how abstraction layers affect perfor
by Deestan 15y ago
> If your fingers protest at the additional "get" in your function names, go and buy yourself a real IDE.
If you can't see how abstraction layers affect performance, go buy yourself a real education. This isn't about premature optimization, it's about not applying premature generalization.
Sometimes it immediately makes sense to add accessors. In that case I add them right away.
Sometimes there is no apparent need for accessors, so I don't add them yet. They're easy to add (you argue so vehemently yourself), why would there be a problem adding them as needed?
A blanket rule of "just add them, always" is just a crutch for mediocre developers who aren't capable or willing to actively think about what they're working on.
- hackinthebochs 15y agoThis smells of bucking conventional wisdom simply for its own sake. Unless you have a good reason not to follow best-practices, you're a bad programmer if you don't (this doesn't always apply if you're writing a project for yourself). Conventional wisdom is there for a reason--it was wisdom hard fought over many iterations from people who came before. Conventional wisdom has won out against many competing ideas, a survival of the fittest of sorts. You may not always fully comprehend the reasoning for a particular 'best-practices' rule, but you're foolish not to follow it for that reason. Adding accessors is not 'premature generalization', it's just how you write well engineered code.