Is defining get/set methods for every field overkill?

[Ali Çehreli]

On 11/16/22 20:39, thebluepandabear wrote:

 > I am debating whether or not I should add getter methods to these
 > properties.

If you are debating, then the answer is easy: you should not. :)

Less code written means less bugs, more cohesion, easier refactoring, 
cleaner code, all good stuff...

Even if a design requires e.g. a 'length' method, the default one should 
be a getter. A setter will come in the future only if 'length = 42' is 
clearly better than e.g. 'expandTo(42)'.

 > in other languages like Java it is a good practice:

I've seen so many tutorials where any user-defined type immediately 
defines getters and setters. It is never good style to do that. There 
are good examples of where doing that is clearly wrong. For example, can 
a Date class really provide a setMonth() setter? It would be so wrong, I 
don't even know where to begin. (I remember talks by Kevlin Henney where 
he would use that example.)

The guidelines I follow are simple in the following order:

- Don't write any code until it makes sense :)

- Don't write a getter until it makes sense

- Don't write a setter until it makes sense

Ali