发表于2004/2/27 10:25:00 3619人阅读
但是我至少有两个理由反驳Uncle Bob的话。第一，有时DTO要对其中携带的数据加以组合或变换，给出适合UI层的形式，这时需要getter（甚至setter）的封装；第二，用jakarta-commons-beanutils工具可以很方便地在提供了Java Bean语意（即getter/setter）的对象之间复制属性。
Oh No! DTO!
February 26, 2004
Should DTOs have public variables? Or should they have private variables with getters and setters?
I'm teaching an XP Immersion(TM) class this week. We are writing FitNesse tests as the acceptance tests for the application we are writing. One of the programmers was using a RowFixture. RowFixture requires the use of a DTO (Data Transfer Object) and insists that the variables be public. The programmer was aghast. "DTOs are always made with private variables and getters and setters!" he said. "Why?" I asked.
Why indeed? Has the religion of OO carried us so far away from common sense that we can't recognize a data structure when we see one? Why do we need to bloat our code with a bunch of useless getters and setters just to fulfill some dogmatic rule that nobody can adequately explain?
In my view OO programs contain two kinds of entities: Objects and Data Structures. Objects have private data and public methods. Data Structures have public data and no methods (or sometimes trivial navigational methods). There are very good reasons for keeping the variables in an object private. We want to know which functions can manipulate them. We want to protect the invariants of the object. We don't want others to depend on our details (DIP). On the other hand there is no good reason to use getters and setters in a data structure. A data structure is simply a packet of data, nothing more.