Databases
StackOverflow2013
Postsdbo
PO
 

Note that there are some explanatory texts on larger screens.

plurals
  1. PO
    primarykey
    data
    text
    <p>I am reaching here. However, I think that the use of Protected member variables should be made conciously, because you not only plan to inherit, but also because there is a solid reason derived classed shouldn't use the Property Setters/Getters defined on the base class. </p> <p>In OOP, we "encapsulate" the member fields so that we can excercise control over how they properties the represent are accessed and changed. When we define a getter/setter on our base for a member variable, we are essentially saying that THIS is how I want this variable to be referenced/used. </p> <p>While there are design-driven exceptions in which one might need to alter the behavior created in the base class getter/setter methods, it seems to me that this would be a decision made after careful consideration of alternatives. </p> <p>For Example, when I find myself needing to access a member field from a derived class directly, instead of through the getter/setter, I start thinking maybe that particular Property should be defined as abstract, or even moved to the derived class. This depends upon how broad the hierarchy is, and any number of additional considerations. But to me, stepping around the public Property defined on the base class begins to smell. </p> <p>Of course, in many cases, it "doesn't matter" because we are not implementing anything within the getter/setter beyond access to the variable. But again, if this is the case, the derived class can just as easily access through the getter/setter. This also protects against hard-to-find bugs later, if employed consistently. If the behgavior of the getter/setter for a member field on the base class is changed in some way, and a derived class references the Protected field directly, there is the potential for trouble. </p>
    singulars
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. POReasons to use private instead of protected for fields and methods
      singulars
      1. PTQuestion
    1. PTAnswer
    1. USXIVSolutions
    1. USXIVSolutions
    plurals
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. VO
      singulars
      1. PO
      1. This table or related slice is empty.
      1. VTUpMod
    2. VO
      singulars
      1. PO
      1. This table or related slice is empty.
      1. VTUpMod
    1. COI should add that, if one decides to follow the strategy defined in my post above, the last important compenent should be: When stepping around the use of getters/setters defined on the base class, DOCUMENT the reasons for doing so! You know. Documenting. We all do that right away, while we're coding. Right? Uh, sure . . .
      singulars
      1. PO
      1. USXIVSolutions
    2. COTo put it another way, some fields that are "private" to a class should be regarded as more private than that--accessed only by the getter/setter of a single property. There isn't any way to declaratively restrict access to a field that tightly, but such a field should generally not be accessed in the derived class.
      singulars
      1. PO
      1. USsupercat
 

Querying!

 
Guidance
A row detail

Detail views are divided into sections. All the information in the data section comes from columns in the selected row. The other sections display data from other, related rows.

Related data can be related in a to-one or a to-many fashion. Captions of data related in a to-many fashion link to a list view showing a filtered view of the table.

Try moving around until you find a non-empty to-many entry and click on the label to get to one. You can move back to the root by clicking on the database name in the header.

SQuiL has stopped working due to an internal error.

If you are curious you may find further information in the browser console, which is accessible through the devtools (F12).

Reload