A provocative naming idea for "setter" methods

[Brian T. Rice]

This is just too verbose, though, and the symbol has to be
capitalized to make the selector, which in reverse translation
results in forgetting the original case.

Lee has stated (off-list) that it's preferrable to create a greater
syntax abstraction system (where "set slot A to " is even possible
and syntax has ZERO to do with concrete hand-typed stuff and is more
about a user interface) and deal with the true problem then. I'm
partly inclined to agree, but haven't made up my mind.

Ken Causey <ken at kencausey.com> said:

> 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