A provocative naming idea for "setter" methods

[Ken Causey]

I just want to say that I personally prefer the current getter/setter
scheme.  I do see your point regarding the noun/verb confusion.  But I
have a word over symbol bias that causes me to dislike the proposed
solutions.  My solution would be to convert the nouns into verb phrases
by prepending 'set' or 'get' to the slot name and camel-casing it.  In
other words having a read/write slot called 'handle' would result in
message names 'getHandle' and 'setHandle:'.  My 2 cents.

Ken
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : /archives/slate/attachments/20050921/3c60445b/attachment.pgp