Comments on: C# Default Access Modifier for Class Members – and drop that private habit! http://jamescrisp.org/2008/05/26/c-default-access-modifier-for-class-members-and-drop-that-private-habit/ C#, .NET, Ruby, Rails, book reviews, mind hacks, Wing Chun and the occasional personal bit. Fri, 18 May 2012 08:47:53 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: Alex Khomich http://jamescrisp.org/2008/05/26/c-default-access-modifier-for-class-members-and-drop-that-private-habit/#comment-26828 Alex Khomich Mon, 04 Oct 2010 05:52:57 +0000 http://jamescrisp.org/2008/05/26/c-default-access-modifier-for-class-members-and-drop-that-private-habit/#comment-26828 Agree with author. But personally I've an issue with it because I'm using Java 1/2 of my working time. I skipping to set private in Java too and all of my fields become package protected... Not good :) Agree with author. But personally I've an issue with it because I'm using Java 1/2 of my working time. I skipping to set private in Java too and all of my fields become package protected... Not good :)

]]> By: Veli http://jamescrisp.org/2008/05/26/c-default-access-modifier-for-class-members-and-drop-that-private-habit/#comment-20372 Veli Mon, 29 Mar 2010 07:42:08 +0000 http://jamescrisp.org/2008/05/26/c-default-access-modifier-for-class-members-and-drop-that-private-habit/#comment-20372 @Jhon The <a href="http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms173121.aspx" rel="nofollow">default access modifier</a> for classes and interfaces is <strong>internal</strong>. I also totally agree with Jed Lawrence. Explicit access modifiers are always a good coding practice, easy on the compiler and easy on the eyes when going through the code. @Jhon
The default access modifier for classes and interfaces is internal.

I also totally agree with Jed Lawrence. Explicit access modifiers are always a good coding practice, easy on the compiler and easy on the eyes when going through the code.

]]> By: Jhon Krammer http://jamescrisp.org/2008/05/26/c-default-access-modifier-for-class-members-and-drop-that-private-habit/#comment-18668 Jhon Krammer Fri, 19 Feb 2010 16:09:03 +0000 http://jamescrisp.org/2008/05/26/c-default-access-modifier-for-class-members-and-drop-that-private-habit/#comment-18668 default access modifier for CLASS ? default access modifier for CLASS ?

]]> By: Swapnil Lamkane http://jamescrisp.org/2008/05/26/c-default-access-modifier-for-class-members-and-drop-that-private-habit/#comment-18370 Swapnil Lamkane Mon, 15 Feb 2010 08:44:20 +0000 http://jamescrisp.org/2008/05/26/c-default-access-modifier-for-class-members-and-drop-that-private-habit/#comment-18370 Jed Lawrence is right. Jed Lawrence is right.

]]> By: Stu http://jamescrisp.org/2008/05/26/c-default-access-modifier-for-class-members-and-drop-that-private-habit/#comment-12397 Stu Tue, 23 Jun 2009 15:12:43 +0000 http://jamescrisp.org/2008/05/26/c-default-access-modifier-for-class-members-and-drop-that-private-habit/#comment-12397 Well I'm agreeing with Jed because I've been developing for years and to be honest forgot what the default was which led me to this post. Go standards go!! Well I'm agreeing with Jed because I've been developing for years and to be honest forgot what the default was which led me to this post. Go standards go!!

]]> By: Mayur O http://jamescrisp.org/2008/05/26/c-default-access-modifier-for-class-members-and-drop-that-private-habit/#comment-11232 Mayur O Fri, 03 Apr 2009 08:36:17 +0000 http://jamescrisp.org/2008/05/26/c-default-access-modifier-for-class-members-and-drop-that-private-habit/#comment-11232 Jed I would have to disagree here with you - depending on how much code you have the compiler may get slower and slower if add the default access modifiers in the code. Jed I would have to disagree here with you - depending on how much code you have the compiler may get slower and slower if add the default access modifiers in the code.

]]> By: Jed Lawrence http://jamescrisp.org/2008/05/26/c-default-access-modifier-for-class-members-and-drop-that-private-habit/#comment-10665 Jed Lawrence Tue, 10 Mar 2009 17:45:36 +0000 http://jamescrisp.org/2008/05/26/c-default-access-modifier-for-class-members-and-drop-that-private-habit/#comment-10665 I disagree. As the "owner" of the C# and .NET standards document for several organizations, we make it a violation of our standards if any programmer creates any class, struct, enum or interface or any member for same without an access modifier. The inclusion of the access modifier makes it explicit what the programmer's intentions were which is a fundamental goal of creating standards. When a programmer leaves off an access modifier we do not know whether they did not know what they were doing and they were just lucky that it worked or whether they were assuming that since they know what the "default" is that they are assuming that ALL .NET programmers know what the default is (an absolutely, horrendous assumption). Good programming standards call for always including the access modifier. Most automated code review environments expect the access modifiers. I disagree. As the "owner" of the C# and .NET standards document for several organizations, we make it a violation of our standards if any programmer creates any class, struct, enum or interface or any member for same without an access modifier. The inclusion of the access modifier makes it explicit what the programmer's intentions were which is a fundamental goal of creating standards. When a programmer leaves off an access modifier we do not know whether they did not know what they were doing and they were just lucky that it worked or whether they were assuming that since they know what the "default" is that they are assuming that ALL .NET programmers know what the default is (an absolutely, horrendous assumption). Good programming standards call for always including the access modifier. Most automated code review environments expect the access modifiers.

]]> By: Jed Lawrence http://jamescrisp.org/2008/05/26/c-default-access-modifier-for-class-members-and-drop-that-private-habit/#comment-10664 Jed Lawrence Tue, 10 Mar 2009 17:43:29 +0000 http://jamescrisp.org/2008/05/26/c-default-access-modifier-for-class-members-and-drop-that-private-habit/#comment-10664 I disagree. As the "owner" of the C# and .NET standards document for several organizations, we make it a violation of our standards is any programmer creates any class, struct, enum or interface or any member for same without an access modifier. The inclusion of the access modifier makes it explicit what the programmer's intentions were which is a fundamental goal of creating standards. When a programmer leaves off an access modifier we do not know whether they did not know what they were doing and they were just lucky that it worked or whether they were assuming that since thy know what the "default" is that they are assuming that ALL .NET programmers know what the default is (an absolutely, horrendous assumption). Good programming standards call for always including the access modifier. Most automated code review environments expect the access modifiers. I disagree. As the "owner" of the C# and .NET standards document for several organizations, we make it a violation of our standards is any programmer creates any class, struct, enum or interface or any member for same without an access modifier. The inclusion of the access modifier makes it explicit what the programmer's intentions were which is a fundamental goal of creating standards. When a programmer leaves off an access modifier we do not know whether they did not know what they were doing and they were just lucky that it worked or whether they were assuming that since thy know what the "default" is that they are assuming that ALL .NET programmers know what the default is (an absolutely, horrendous assumption). Good programming standards call for always including the access modifier. Most automated code review environments expect the access modifiers.

]]> By: Tim http://jamescrisp.org/2008/05/26/c-default-access-modifier-for-class-members-and-drop-that-private-habit/#comment-5237 Tim Thu, 19 Jun 2008 06:56:56 +0000 http://jamescrisp.org/2008/05/26/c-default-access-modifier-for-class-members-and-drop-that-private-habit/#comment-5237 Glad to see you dont like writing those extra chars either. Glad to see you dont like writing those extra chars either.

]]> By: Matt Dunn http://jamescrisp.org/2008/05/26/c-default-access-modifier-for-class-members-and-drop-that-private-habit/#comment-3854 Matt Dunn Tue, 27 May 2008 01:51:19 +0000 http://jamescrisp.org/2008/05/26/c-default-access-modifier-for-class-members-and-drop-that-private-habit/#comment-3854 Nooooooo, but then I have to remember that no access modifier means private! And StyleCop will complain :) Cheers, Matt Nooooooo, but then I have to remember that no access modifier means private! And StyleCop will complain :)

Cheers,
Matt

]]>