19 Nov
2004
19 Nov
'04
6:41 a.m.
(replying to own message)
On Fri, 2004-11-19 at 01:34, MenTaLguY wrote:
I wouldn't try that unless the getter was unacceptably slow.
...and the setter really isn't called often. The assumption being that it's more OK for the setter to be very slow than it is for the getter to be very slow.
But since the setter would be exponentially slower than the slow getter, perhaps that still wouldn't be a good tradeoff.
-mental