commons-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Kenneth Stout" <>
Subject Re: [beanutils] not finding the setter
Date Wed, 02 Jul 2003 21:30:41 GMT
Hi Craig,

Glad you shared your opinion. I would tend to agree (even though I was
inadvertently breaking the rules). I also believe that BeanUtils makes an
assumption as to what is being returned from java.beans.Introspector and as
a result it is unable to find the set<PropertyName> descriptor. It then goes
so far as to generate a debug message that is misleading.

Would you agree that BeanUtils should find the set<PropertyName>, if it
exists, regardless of its position within the descriptors returned by


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Craig R. McClanahan" <>
To: "Jakarta Commons Users List" <>
Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2003 1:21 PM
Subject: Re: [beanutils] not finding the setter

> On Wed, 2 Jul 2003, Kenneth Stout wrote:
> > Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 12:50:14 -0700
> > From: Kenneth Stout <>
> > Reply-To: Jakarta Commons Users List <>
> > To: Jakarta Commons Users List <>
> > Subject: Re: [beanutils] not finding the setter
> >
> > I hadn't tried making the base property boolean. But my tests show that
> > boolean works with both a get<PropertyName> and is<PropertyName>
> > Its a String based property that will not work. Very interesting.
> >
> > So I guess my question for the community would is, should BeanUtils be
> > enhanced to handle the is<PropertyName> descriptor that is returned by
> > java.beans.Introspector or should it stay conforming to the "letter of
> > standard"?
> >
> The mission of BeanUtils is to provide extended support for JavaBeans.
> While there are some things above and beyond plain JavaBeans that are
> supported, they are done so in a style that is similar to the way things
> work with standard JavaBeans, in order to maximize knowledge transfer and
> minimize surprises.
> Doing what it sounds like you are suggesting (allowing a String setter and
> a boolean getter for the same property name), though, would violate one of
> the core characteristics of JavaBeans -- what a "property" is, and how it
> is recognized.  Any support for such a thing in BeanUtils would *not* get
> reflected into the hundreds of other applications that use standard Java
> introspection to acquire property getter and setter information.
> Therefore, I think this woud be an exceedingly bad idea, and will -1 a
> proposal to implement it.
> You should make sure that your JavaBean is really a JavaBean if you expect
> BeanUtils to help you utilize it.  One common approach is to use two
> different property names in your bean class - something like:
>   public boolean isFoo();
>   public void setFoo(booean foo);
>   public String getFooAsString();
>   public void setFooAsString(String fooAsString);
> and link the two internally (by doing the appropriate conversions).
> Craig McClanahan
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message