March 16th, 2013, 10:25 PM
Encapsulation! Is there really a good enough reason to use bug words?
Why not just call it accessibility or visibility type? Big words like Encapsulation are really not neccessary specially not convenient for non Englsh speakers.
Comments on this post
March 16th, 2013, 11:02 PM
What's the whole point of this thread? None of us invented the term, nobody forces you to use it.
"Data encapsulation", "inheritance" etc. are keywords bound to specific concepts of OOP. When you use them, people know right away what you mean (hopefully). But if you don't like them, don't use them. It's that simple.
March 16th, 2013, 11:18 PM
The point is he doesn't know the answer and wants to understand why.
Most languages, APIs, SDKs, and the like are written or designed by English speaking people. English is the language of programming. That's how it is.
Encapsulation describes something that has nothing to do with accessibility so I don't know why you picked those terms.
March 16th, 2013, 11:33 PM
Wow, that explains everything! Who would have guessed that English is a common language in the IT world? I'm sure he'll be delighted by this insight.
Originally Posted by requinix
Data encapsulation has nothing to do with accessibility? Well, a capsule that's accessible from all directions would be a rather strange capsule ...
March 17th, 2013, 12:11 AM
Hmm, I guess I was confusing encapsulation with... that other one where data is hidden but you aren't really supposed to have access to it... damn what's the term... Ah, whatever.
March 17th, 2013, 12:19 AM
Composition! That one. Class encapsulates various functionalities, class is composed of various functionalities...