Is defining get/set methods for every field overkill?

On Friday, 18 November 2022 at 20:18:41 UTC, matheus wrote:
> On Friday, 18 November 2022 at 09:42:21 UTC, []() {}() wrote:
>> ...
>
> I think you missed the point of that video very badly.
>
> By the way just a few points from that video:
>
> Around: 2:32 -> "Never ever put in an 'accessor' until it 
> actually does something...".

ok. But then you've made the member variable a part of the 
interface to the client, and if you even need to constrain the 
value being assigned to the member, you will have to break that 
interface.

In production-level code, it is rare you would allow 
unconstrained access to a member variable. Not unheard of, just 
rare. And in any case, a simple accessor allows you to do so, 
should you're business rules ever change.

You should plan for change, in production-level code. That's the 
'point' missing from that rant in that video.

>
> Around: 3:10 -> "If there is an 'accessor' it had better do 
> something in there...".
>

It likely already does something, in that- >'it allows for change 
to occur without having to break the clients interface'.

That too is the 'point' missing from that rant.