java 打破封装_关于java：setter和getter方法是否打破了封装？

Having getters and setters does not in itself break encapsulation.

What does break encapsulation is having a getter and a setter for

every data member (every field, in java lingo). That is one step away

from making all data members public.

The point of encapsulation is not that you should not be able to know

or to change the object's state from outside the object, but that you

should have a reasonable policy for doing it.

Consider an example of a class Person. Let's say a person has a name,

a social security number, and an age. Let's say that we do not allow

people to ever change their names or social security numbers. However,

the person's age should be incremented by 1 every year. In this case,

you would provide a constructor that would initialize the name and the

SSN to the given values, and which would initialize the age to 0. You

would also provide a method incrementAge(), which would increase the

age by 1. You would also provide getters for all three. No setters are

required in this case.

In this design you allow the state of the object to be inspected from

outside the class, and you allow it to be changed from outside the

class. However, you do not allow the state to be changed arbitrarily.

There is a policy, which effectively states that the name and the SSN

cannot be changed at all, and that the age can be incremented by 1

year at a time.

Now let's say a person also has a salary. And people can change jobs

at will, which means their salary will also change. To model this

situation we have no other way but to provide a setSalary() method!

Allowing the salary to be changed at will is a perfectly reasonable

policy in this case.

By the way, in your example, I would give the class Fridge the

putCheese() and takeCheese() methods, instead of get_cheese() and

set_cheese(). Then you would still have encapsulation.