16f6c0aecf
Inline adoc files when they are included exactly once. Also fix language tags because this inlining gives us better information on what language the code is written in.
53 lines
1.3 KiB
Plaintext
53 lines
1.3 KiB
Plaintext
== Why is this an issue?
|
|
|
|
The difference between ``++private++`` and ``++protected++`` visibility is that child classes can see and use ``++protected++`` members, but they cannot see ``++private++`` ones. Since a ``++sealed++`` class cannot have children, marking its members ``++protected++`` is confusingly pointless.
|
|
|
|
=== Noncompliant code example
|
|
|
|
[source,csharp]
|
|
----
|
|
public sealed class MySealedClass
|
|
{
|
|
protected string name = "Fred"; // Noncompliant
|
|
protected void SetName(string name) // Noncompliant
|
|
{
|
|
// ...
|
|
}
|
|
}
|
|
----
|
|
|
|
=== Compliant solution
|
|
|
|
[source,csharp]
|
|
----
|
|
public sealed class MySealedClass
|
|
{
|
|
private string name = "Fred";
|
|
public void SetName(string name)
|
|
{
|
|
// ...
|
|
}
|
|
}
|
|
----
|
|
|
|
ifdef::env-github,rspecator-view[]
|
|
|
|
'''
|
|
== Implementation Specification
|
|
(visible only on this page)
|
|
|
|
include::../message.adoc[]
|
|
|
|
include::../highlighting.adoc[]
|
|
|
|
'''
|
|
== Comments And Links
|
|
(visible only on this page)
|
|
|
|
=== on 21 Feb 2017, 16:32:27 Valeri Hristov wrote:
|
|
Removing the "static" part because the C# compiler generates an error if you try to add protected member in a static class. It does not generate error for sealed classes, so the rule still has value.
|
|
|
|
include::../comments-and-links.adoc[]
|
|
|
|
endif::env-github,rspecator-view[]
|