Re: Enabling Access to Private Fields

From: Russell B. Eggen (NOreggen_at_gte.netSPAM)
Date: 10/27/03

  • Next message: Doug Bahr: "Re: Help on Creating a Custom Permission" 
    Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2003 13:45:59 -0500

    Technically, I really don't know. But I am going along with the thought
    that if I slap a private attribute on something, then that is encapsulated
    in the declaring object only. If I provide methods to inspect the values or
    provide a safe way to change properties (bending the concept of
    encapsulation), then I get the best of both worlds.

    If what you really need and want is a "semi-private" property that is
    available only in the derived object chain, I am not clear how you go about
    this as I am still studying the mechanics.

    I am talking mostly from what encapsulation is and means and how I coded
    this in other languages. 

    -- 
Russ Eggen
www.radfusion.com
"Jeff Benson" <blaster151@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23vlSfELnDHA.684@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
Are you saying that what I'm asking about isn't possible?
Is there no way to designate fields as accessible only by certain clients
who declare certain security rights?  I was under the impression that that's
what code-level permissions are all about.
Maybe I'm approaching the question the wrong way.  How about if I frame it
like this: can I fabricate a new class using CodeDom and have it be
considered part of the current, running assembly?  With the same permissions
and access?
Jeff
blaster151@hotmail.com
  • Next message: Doug Bahr: "Re: Help on Creating a Custom Permission"