commons-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alfonso da Silva <alfonsodasi...@e-milio.com>
Subject [BeanUtils-Patch] DynaProperty and BasicDynaBean patches
Date Tue, 26 Aug 2003 12:42:05 GMT
Hi!

I include DynaProperty and BasicDynaBean patches.

I've removed the keyType attribute in the DynaProperty class and I've
modified the set(String,int,Object) and set(String,String,Object)
methods: Now, if the DynaProperty's contentType attribute isn's null,
they verify if the class value is compatible with the contentType.


Alf.


El Mon, 25 Aug 2003 22:16:41 +0100 robert burrell donkin escribió:

> On Friday, August 22, 2003, at 01:05 PM, Alfonso da Silva wrote:
> 
> > Hi!
> 
> hi Alfonso
> 
> > I have two doubts:
> >
> > 1) The present implementation of DynaProperty allows Maps with keys of
> > any class. However, the defición of DynaBean only allows String keys.
> >
> > I believe that he is better to modify DynaProperty to adapt it, although
> > also exists the possibility of extending the DynaBean interface with:
> >
> >  -java.lang.Object get(java.lang.String name, java.lang.Object key)
> >
> >  -void set(java.lang.String name, java.lang.Object key,
> java.lang.Object 
> > value)
> >
> > But it can cause many problems of compatibility!!!!
> >
> > If everything is ok, I will modify DynaProperty (and I will
> generate diff 
> > ;) ).
> 
> you're correct that the DynaBean interface only allows stringy keys.
> since 
> it's an interface it'll have to start that way (it cannot be modified 
> without breaking compatibility).
> 
> i think it's probably ok to (quickly) remove the key type (at least, i 
> think that this is what you're suggesting) unless anyone else can
> think of 
> a reason why it might be useful.
> 
> > 2) It would be necessary to modify BasicDynaBean to use the new
> > functionalities of DynaProperty (if they are implemented, because they
> > are optional) or is better to create another implementation of Dynabean
> > that uses them?
> 
> i'm not how you propose to adapt this class to support this feature. if 
> you feel like contributing a patch i'll understand a little better and be 
> able to determine whether it's better to create new classes or patch old.
> 
> - robert
> 
> 


--
Mensaje enviado desde http://www.e-milio.com
Mime
View raw message