Newsgroups: comp.lang.smalltalk
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!satisfied.elf.com!news.mathworks.com!news.alpha.net!mixcom.com!Cecelia.Borden
From: Cecelia Borden <Cecelia.Borden@mixcom.com>
Subject: Re: private methods
Message-ID: <1995Feb2.032924.15747@mixcom.com>
Sender: vvbbvv@mixcom.com (Cecelia Borden)
Organization: MIX Communications, Milwaukee, WI  info@mixcom.com
References: <1995Jan27.044227.29262@mixcom.com> <3glf8o$e7k@m1.cs.man.ac.uk>
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 2 Feb 1995 03:29:24 GMT
Lines: 15

In <3glf8o$e7k@m1.cs.man.ac.uk> pjc@cs.man.ac.uk (Peter Crowther (MIG)) writes:

>> What do you think about adding a pvt_
>> prefix to methods that should be private. I think this
>> would help when reviewing code to show when a method is
>> being used where it shouldn't be.

>The same thing can be done (semi-)automatically using the
>organizations. Just prowl for messages that are being sent, but
>are in protocols that start 'private'.

   what do you mean by 'using the organizations'?
   are you referring to the class reporter?
-- 
Cecelia
