Re: [Vala] property overrides need to be declared public?

[Jürg Billeter <j bitron ch>]

On Wed, 2008-07-23 at 06:19 -0700, Michael Lawrence wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 2:43 AM, Jürg Billeter <j bitron ch> wrote:
>         
>         On Fri, 2008-06-27 at 22:42 -0700, Michael Lawrence wrote:
>         > When overriding a property, I found that I needed to declare
>         it
>         > 'public' before it was actually accessible (i.e. the
>         internal getter
>         > function was defined but the override was not registered in
>         > class_init). Is this by design? It's certainly strange to
>         privately
>         > override something.
>         
>         
>         The convention in Vala and C# are that the accessibility of
>         the
>         overriding method must be the same as the accessibility of the
>         overridden method. We might want to consider to allow more
>         flexibility
>         at some point, however, at the moment you should follow the
>         convention.
>
> This makes sense, but why is it possible to omit the "public" keyword
> when overriding a method, but not for a property?

That's not intentional, it shouldn't be possible for methods, either,
that's just a missing check.

However, I'm actually considering dropping this and only requiring the
developer to write `public` to export new symbols.

Any opinions on that?

Juerg