commons-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Brian K. Wallace" <>
Subject Re: [betwixt] BeanReader - setXXX(Object)
Date Mon, 07 Apr 2003 16:58:25 GMT
Robert -
  I pulled down the betwixt code and after a bit of nosing around, came to
  the same conclusion... for better or worse. (better that I didn't come
  to the wrong one, worse that I posted before looking thoroughly I gues).
  I know there are other instances for Objects that aren't beans - and in
  the interest of solving my own issues for the interim, wrote a hack into
  my BeanRuleSet (bad - I know, but it works for now) that accomodates
  Integer and BigDecimals (the ones I need at present) so I'd be very
  interested to hear the outcome of this issue (hmmm... dev list maybe? :)
  ).  I also noticed the 'className' attribute which I found helpful (had to
  make a mod for Object == String on this one... bad again, but hey)...
  but odd. While I understand the usefulness of being able to tell the
  reader exactly what class to use, would it not make more sense to create
  a 'mapName' attribute basically telling the reader "use whatever you
  have mapped to 'MyObject'"? It may be great for internal Java processes
  to go directly to class 'MyObject', but when the 'writer' of the XML
  isn't java, may not even be local or know the recipient's package layout
  and class names, why bother requiring a className to be known. All that
  said, I wouldn't want to see 'className' removed entirely... just "if
  (mapName != null) use map; else if (className != null) use class;".  I
  know this applies more to the dreaded "Object" environment... but it's
  nice to have classes that are more generic sometimes. My 2 cents, I
  guess... both from a 'user' and a 'developer'.
  Thanks again for the response, tho'.

> hi brian
> i'm pretty sure that this is because betwixt uses the property
> signature  to guess the type of object you want to create. so betwixt
> thinks that you  want an object of Object type to be created.
> there is an added complication with using an Integer object - and
> that's  because it's not a bean. you need to pass in the information in
> the  constructor rather calling setters.
> having said that, i have some ideas about how to support this kind of
> thing which i'll raise on the dev list and see what people think.
> - robert
> On Friday, April 4, 2003, at 05:55 AM, Brian K. Wallace wrote:
>>   I was wondering if there is something I'm missing, or if Betwixt
>>   just can't do it as is. Given the following XML:
>> <Element>
>>   <name>Element 1</name>
>>   <value>
>>     <Integer>5</Integer
>>   </value>
>> </Element>
>> and the following bean mapped to the "Element" XML element:
>> public class ElementBean {
>>   private String mName;
>>   private Object mValue;
>>   public ElementBean() {
>>   }
>>   public void setName(String iName) {
>>     mName = iName;
>>   }
>>   public String getName() {
>>     return mName;
>>   }
>>   public void setValue(Object iValue) {
>>     mValue = iValue;
>>   }
>>   public Object getValue() {
>>     return mValue;
>>   }
>> }
>> Is there any way to get the value (5) into the Element's setValue
>> method as an Integer as opposed to an Object?  I rely on being able to
>> reuse objects and pulling out the values as appropriate, but with the
>> BeanReader, all calls to 'getValue' result in Object@....
>> Aside from my 'Object'ion, the reader parses fine. Any help would be
>> appreciated.
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>> For additional commands, e-mail:
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: For
> additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message