Objections combining a getter and setter in a single method?

<p>What are the objections with combining a getter and setter in a single method?</p> <p>Example:</p> <pre><code>// Name is both a getter and setter to the name property. func (p *Person) Name(value ...string) string { if len(value) &gt; 0 { p.name = strings.Title(value[len(value)-1]) } return p.name } func ExampleGetSet() { p := &amp;Person{name: &#34;marie&#34;} p.Name(&#34;anna&#34;) name := p.Name() fmt.Println(name) // Output: Anna } </code></pre> <p><a href="https://gist.github.com/namsral/c4ed7aa6650221146cd1faa8c5ac9748" rel="nofollow">gistgithub.com</a></p> <hr/>**评论：**<br/><br/>k_u_r_o_k_u_s_e: <pre><p>this is not idiomatic,that&#39;s all; someone else pointed effective Go guide, you should follow it, that&#39;s a strict minimum.</p> <p>for a property prop , your getter should be called Prop()T and your setter SetProp(T) .</p></pre>metamatic: <pre><p>I get the impression that getters and setters aren&#39;t encouraged much at all in Go. For example, look at how many directly exposed fields there are in the http part of stdlib.</p></pre>k_u_r_o_k_u_s_e: <pre><p>Yeah, the thing is the std lib has quite a few problems IHMO but was never refactored because of compatibility issues. Using Getters and Setters allows &#34;uniform message passing&#34; and also replacing concrete types with interfaces in function parameters. I think it is a good practice, in general. I mean it&#39;s like factories. Should people write factories or create values by declaring structs ? I believe in strict encapsulation which allows efficient refactoring. But if a struct has no method or is a &#34;bean&#34; ( data transfer object), then struct declaration is preferable. </p></pre>dchapes: <pre><blockquote> <p>Clear is better than clever.<br/> -- <a href="https://go-proverbs.github.io/" rel="nofollow">Go Proverbs</a></p> </blockquote> <p><code>p.SetName(&#34;anna&#34;)</code> is clear, abusing variadic paramaters is not (and IMHO it&#39;s not very clever). And what about someone that does <code>p.Name(&#34;anna&#34;, &#34;WTF?!&#34;)</code>; compiler type checking and function/method signature checking is a good thing.</p></pre>RalphCorderoy: <pre><p>Relevant to the conversation: <a href="https://golang.org/doc/effective_go.html#Getters" rel="nofollow">https://golang.org/doc/effective_go.html#Getters</a>.</p></pre>madman2233: <pre><p>Seems redundant getting a return of the same thing your setting. Might be more useful if you returned the old value if you set a new one.</p></pre>cfsalguero: <pre><p>It is not bad. It is not Go idiomatic, it is Perl idiomatic: <a href="http://docstore.mik.ua/orelly/perl4/porm/ch09_13.htm" rel="nofollow">http://docstore.mik.ua/orelly/perl4/porm/ch09_13.htm</a></p></pre>