Code review comment for lp:~thumper/nux/properties

Revision history for this message
Tim Penhey (thumper) wrote :

On Mon, 11 Jul 2011 21:46:29 you wrote:
> Good point. Conceptually I'd say that one needs a private or protected
> setter function that does this (which must be used by the consumers
> just like a public setter would), but if I understand correctly
> ROProps don't have setters in this setup?

Exactly. Given that the property is a member itself, you can't have a
protected setter that is accessible by the containing class.

« Back to merge proposal