[Opensim-dev] Avatar movement packet optimization

[Diva Canto]

+1 on everything Stefan said.
Subclassing is always your friend.


Stefan Andersson wrote:
>  
> > > 2) Going from 'private' to 'protected' because of the need to
> > > subclass in a particular proprietary application should never be a
> > > problem. This strenghtens the API.
> >
> > This is not always the case. See 
> http://opensimulator.org/mantis/view.php?id=3072. Sometimes there are 
> good reasons
> > for keeping methods private.
>
> I think that discussion has to be separated; I don't know the reason 
> for those members to be kept private (other than that the plugin 
> 'wasn't intended to be subclassed' which is fair enough) but I can say 
> that generally the only reason to hesitate over going from 'private' 
> to 'protected' is if code is written so that state integrity is 
> pivotal for method execution - something that usually points to the 
> code being brittle in the first place. (Compare with calling virtual 
> members from constructors for a similar concern)
>  
> I am perfectly aware that this is touching on religion so I won't push 
> the issue further; suffice to say that "in most cases" we should not 
> have a problem with it.
>  
> For the interested, I suggest you google for religious flame wars on 
> the proper use of "internal" and "sealed" as well. ;-)
>  
> By the way, I take your +1's as meaning we're discussing this in order 
> to form an explicit concensus - if I have recieved no strong 
> objections, I will add this to the code conventions by friday 20/2 2009.
>  
> Best Regards,
> /Stefan
>  
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Opensim-dev mailing list
> Opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>   

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://opensimulator.org/pipermail/opensim-dev/attachments/20090213/513cb6ca/attachment-0001.html>