Mailing-List: contact commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" <commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2005 01:04:48 +0100
Message-Id: <200503190004.j2J04mA7010844@ajax.apache.org>
From: bugzilla@apache.org
To: commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org
Subject: DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33979]  -
    MethodUtils.invoke for static methods

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG�
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
<http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33979>.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND�
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33979


------- Additional Comments From skitching@apache.org  2005-03-19 01:04 -------
Hi,

I'm sorry there has been no feedback from other beanutils maintainers on whether
this patch is appropriate for beanutils or not (as discussed in email thread on
commons-dev). I've posted another reminder to that list. If no-one responds this
time, then on return I'll just go ahead and commit the patch (well, once the
issues mentioned on commons-dev are addressed).

I am a little concerned about having
  // invoke non-static method
  invokeMethod(Object, String, Object[], Class[])
and
  // invoke static method
  invokeMethod(Class, String, Object[], Class[])

Because Class is also an Object, there seems potential for confusion.
What do you think about changing the name of the new methods?
  invokeStaticMethod(Class, String, Object[], Class[])
  etc

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org