Public properties issue?

[jim-parry]

A user on the IRC channel (crazywane) seems to think that public properties are a problem?
https://gist.github.com/Golpha/c64bc7a67db1ed9463f7fec13e1e6f4c

[lonnieezell]

I can't see how. When used with intention, the public property is part of the class' contract. That link only shows a "high-performance" way to bypass said contract. I put high-performance in quotes because accessing a public property is still faster. :)

I have come across the rule in the past that "ALL THE THINGS MUST BE PROTECTED". And I usually fall into the camp that says that any rule that includes the words "all of the time", "always", "never", etc, is going to be wrong at some point. I agree in general that things should be protected, with getter/setter methods, and I have done it that way through the vast majority of the framework. When things are public, they typically needed to be that way for a reason.

[jim-parry]

Good to know. I won't lose any sleep over this :)