openjpa-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michael Dick <>
Subject Re: Use getters/setters only
Date Tue, 16 Jun 2009 13:39:39 GMT
Minor clarification, the client of the entity (ie your application) should
not access the fields directly - regardless of the access type.

>From section 2.1 of the JPA 1.0 spec

The persistent state of an entity is represented by instance variables,
which may correspond to Java-
Beans properties. An instance variable may be directly accessed only from
within the methods of the
entity by the entity instance itself. Instance variables must not be
accessed by clients of the entity. The
state of the entity is available to clients only through the entity’s
accessor methods (getter/setter methods)
or other business methods. Instance variables must be private, protected, or
package visibility.

Regarding advantages and disadvantages of different access types it really
depends on the application. The reason (AFAIK) for the difference in
behavior is to allow for business logic in the accessor methods. When you
have business logic there it may make sense for the JPA provider to use
FIELD access (and avoid your logic). If there's no business logic then
PROPERTY may be the way to go.


On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 2:24 PM, Daryl Stultz <> wrote:

> On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 2:20 PM, Simon Droscher <
>> wrote:
> >
> > The major point it makes is this:
> > When using property access, only the getter and setter method for a
> > property
> > should ever access the underlying persistent field directly
> That's exactly what I was looking for, thanks.
> Note that none of this is relevant if you are using field access rather
> than
> > property access.
> >
> But I didn't expect that!
> (from the manual)
> > To use field access for an entity using annotation metadata, simply place
> >> your metadata and mapping annotations on your field declarations:
> >>
> >
> I am using field access. I placed my annotations on the fields simply
> because I like them there. I didn't realize there was a functional
> difference. Is there any advantage/disadvantage to field vs property
> access?
> It seems property access has the potential gotcha, while field does not.
> Perhaps there is some other cost...
> --
> Daryl Stultz
> _____________________________________
> 6 Degrees Software and Consulting, Inc.

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message