Comments on: @Getter annotation?

By: stephan

stephan — Mon, 26 Nov 2007 05:58:07 +0000

@Carsten, @Jim: Yes, I’m following the discussion with much interest. Let’s hope Java gets better property handling with Java 7. Perhaps even something Javascript like (which is beautiful in it’s simplicity), combining properties with BCGA:

   myclass.setX = {int x => this.x = x}
   myclass.x = 3

By: Jim

Jim — Mon, 26 Nov 2007 02:05:04 +0000

Quite a lot of discussion about this for Java 7:
http://tech.puredanger.com/java7#property

By: Carsten Saager

Carsten Saager — Sun, 25 Nov 2007 22:45:20 +0000

The lowercase getter is already used: It is the accessor to a final field. (See ordinal(), name() in Enum)

When I look at the discussions over Java 7 I am all but sure if I want to use this Java. Luckily there are Scala and C#. I don’t want a Smalltalk Java nor a Google Java (interesting that the Google Collections look horrible now but will look nice as soon as the Google suggestions will make it into the language)

By: stephan

stephan — Sun, 25 Nov 2007 20:56:13 +0000

A final public field makes it hard to change the behavior in the future I guess. Groovy/Scala/Ruby properties would be best. Hope for Java 7.

By: Peter Lawrey

Peter Lawrey — Sun, 25 Nov 2007 20:53:45 +0000

Another option, if the getter doesn’t do anything why not have a public final field?

By: stephan

stephan — Sun, 25 Nov 2007 11:36:21 +0000

Or use Groovy ;-) Scala is nice indeed. I don’t think it will get into the mainstream but it might show the way for a Java future (type inference, actors, class matching).

And of course: away with the parenthesis.

By: Michael Nischt

Michael Nischt — Sun, 25 Nov 2007 11:27:28 +0000

And then we make the parenthesis..
or just use scala ;-)

http://www.scala-lang.org/docu/files/api/scala/reflect/BeanProperty.html
(with val only get* will be produced)

By: stephan

stephan — Sat, 24 Nov 2007 16:28:40 +0000

Care to explain?

By: Laird Nelson

Laird Nelson — Sat, 24 Nov 2007 15:14:52 +0000

Not entirely sure what you’re looking for, but you can do this with PropertyDescriptors.