Re: Property Accessors v1.2

Hi! > Stas, the proposed "solution" thus far is to make the getter or setter > final and private and not have a body. This would naturally throw an > exception if it was accessed from anywhere but the class it was defined. > The class it was defined in has to remember that it is virtually a > read/write only accessor. What you mean by "not have a body" - is there special syntax for body-less methods introduced? Then it should be in the RFC. How it is implemented - what exactly is stored in the function table then? -- Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/ (408)454-6900 ext. 227