commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Tim O'Brien <tobr...@discursive.com>
Subject Re: [jexl] size method unit test failing
Date Tue, 09 Sep 2003 12:25:02 GMT
On Tue, 2003-09-09 at 06:58, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> I guess we were going to figure out if we want to add the artificial  
> notion of the length field, or just ask people to use size().  'length'  
> is really weird, as it doesn't really exist as a field, and only  
> applies to arrays.
> 
> Why confuse the syntax with an additional way to get size?

People may expect "length" to work, but as long as it is properly 
documented for users I see no problem with asking people to use size()
instead of length.

"length" is a public final field in all array types, but from what I see
ASTIdentifier just delegates to ASTArrayAccess which then decides how to
deal with an identifier (isMap -> isList -> isArray -> bean prop).

We could just as easily add a step after accessing a bean property in
ASTArrayAccess which tried to access a public field.  What do you
think?    







Mime
View raw message