Is defining get/set methods for every field overkill?

[Alexandru Ermicioi]

On Thursday, 17 November 2022 at 04:39:35 UTC, thebluepandabear 
wrote:
> I am creating a TUI library and I have a class with the 
> following constant fields:
>
> ```
> class Label : Renderable {
>     const string text;
>     const TextAlignment textAlignment;
>     const Color color;
>
>     this(Dimensions dimensions, string text, TextAlignment 
> textAlignment, Color color) {
>         this.dimensions = dimensions;
>         this(text, textAlignment, color);
>     }
>
>     this(string text, TextAlignment textAlignment, Color color) 
> {
>         this.text = text;
>         this.textAlignment = textAlignment;
>         this.color = color;
>     }
>
>     override Cell[] render() const {
>         Cell[] cells;
>
>         for (int x = 0; x < 0 + text.length; ++x) {
>             cells ~= Cell(Coordinates(x, 0), text[x], color);
>         }
>
>         return cells;
>     }
> }
> ```
>
> I am debating whether or not I should add getter methods to 
> these properties. On one hand, it will inflate the codebase by 
> a lot, on the other hand -- in other languages like Java it is 
> a good practice:
>
> ```
> class Label : Renderable {
>     private const string text;
>     private const TextAlignment textAlignment;
>     private const Color color;
>
>     this(Dimensions dimensions, string text, TextAlignment 
> textAlignment, Color color) {
>         this.dimensions = dimensions;
>         this(text, textAlignment, color);
>     }
>
>     this(string text, TextAlignment textAlignment, Color color) 
> {
>         this.text = text;
>         this.textAlignment = textAlignment;
>         this.color = color;
>     }
>
>     string getText() const {
>         return text;
>     }
>
>     TextAlignment getTextAlignment() const {
>         return textAlignment;
>     }
>
>     Color getColor() const {
>         return color;
>     }
>
>     override Cell[] render() const {
>         Cell[] cells;
>
>         for (int x = 0; x < 0 + text.length; ++x) {
>             cells ~= Cell(Coordinates(x, 0), text[x], color);
>         }
>
>         return cells;
>     }
> }
> ```
>
> It's not a lot of code that has been added but if you have a 
> class with say 10 different fields, adding getter methods would 
> definitely increase the code size by a lot, so what are you 
> guys thoughts on this?

Dunno if someone mentioned, but you can minimize use of 
boilerplate by hiding it into mixin templates. Say you have:
```D
mixin template Property(T) {
   private T subject_;

   T Property() { return subject_; }
   void Property(T value) { subject_ = value; }
}
```


The you can use it in your class to define properties of class:
```D
class MyMegaPropertyClass {
   mixin Property!(string) myFancyProperty;
}

auto c = new MyMegaPropertyClass()

c.myFancyProperty = "indeed"
```

The only issue is that, by using eponymous naming you also block 
any access of underlying subject_ or any other miscellaneous info 
that you may add.

Best regards,
Alexandru.