Re: c.d.theory glossary - Class
From: mAsterdam <mAsterdam_at_vrijdag.org>
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2004 14:15:14 +0200
Message-ID: <40827153$0$560$e4fe514c_at_news.xs4all.nl>
>
>
> Why restrict it to abstract attributes and behavior?
That should have been:
Why expand it to abstract attributes and behavior?
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2004 14:15:14 +0200
Message-ID: <40827153$0$560$e4fe514c_at_news.xs4all.nl>
Correction:
mAsterdam wrote:
>> And how about "abstract attributes and behavior"?
>
>
> Why restrict it to abstract attributes and behavior?
That should have been:
Why expand it to abstract attributes and behavior?
This conflicts with at least one school of thought. Key: "accessor methods" Received on Sun Apr 18 2004 - 14:15:14 CEST