commons-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Durham David Cntr 805CSS/SCBE" <David.Durh...@scott.af.mil>
Subject RE: [Digester] SetPropertiesRule
Date Fri, 21 Feb 2003 18:55:14 GMT
First off, I'll clarify the xOffset property name problem.  For those that already know what
it is, you can skip this section.

A property or attribute in the form of first letter lower case and second letter capitalized
will not map to a javabean method.  This is because the expected method name with both letters
capitalized is supposed to map to a property with the same name of the method, i.e.  getXOffset()
will map to the XOffset property and there is no method name that will map to the xOffSet
property.


Craig wrote:
> > >
> > > No, it's not.  Welcome to the wonderful world of the
> > > JavaBeans rules on
> > > converting property names to getter and setter method names.

To me it seems that this is more appropriately phrased welcome to the world of converting
getter and setter method names to property names, because that's what you have to do to make
sure property names are valid.  This is fine if that's the way Sun wants it, but I don't agree
with limiting the set of property names if it can be accomplished without doing so.  Perhaps
the spec should just say use an underscore notation like get_propertyName and leave the property
name the same.  

This will be particularly problematic if the javabean author can not change the property names
set.  For instance, let's say that I'm receiving an XML document from a bank that has lot's
of other systems that also need this XML document.  Changing the XML doc to work with the
Javabeans technology is cost prohibitive so the solution is don't use Javabeans.  Not exactly
what Sun had in mind when they created it.

> > >
> > > The details of the naming patterns are in the JavaBeans 
> Specification,
> > > which you can get from:
> > >
> > >   http://java.sun.com/products/javabeans/

I want to say, who gives a crap about what naming conventions programmers are most comfortable
with? Designs are not about creating easy to read code although they often have that effect,
they are about creating something that works.  This spec doesn't work IMHO.

> > >
> > > Craig
> > >

Dave

Mime
View raw message