Small property support.

[Ruslan]

Hello.

David Goodenough wrote:
> On Wednesday 18 March 2009, Ruslan wrote:
>   
>> Hello.
>>
>> Yes, i have read it.
>> But we are trying to fix different things:
>> - You are trying to get rid of strings in "Beans Binding of JPA Criteria
>> API"
>>     
> As a matter of interest, how would I pass a property reference using
> your proposal?
>   
My proposal have another goal. Goal is to have synthetic sugar like 
for-each for property.
And in my case there is not property reference, so you can not pass it.

Property references can be added at next release (5 years later ;) ).


>> - And my point is to make property code readable and get rid of
>> getters/setters when use Dependency Injection.
>>     
> For simple getters and setters, my proposal does actually get rid of 
> getters and setters, in that the Property object will do the work for you
> using the Field get and set (and some snake oil to handle 
> PropertyChangeSupport).
>   
Yes, that is true. And my proposal are not using Property or Field. It's 
like macros for property get/set generation.
> David
>   
PS my goal is to avoid situation like this:
    private int i;
   
    public String getI() {
        return Integer.toString(i);
    }
   
    public void setI(long i) {
        this.i = (int)i;
    }

What is the type of property 'i' ?

private int i;
   
    public int getJ() {
        return i;
    }
   
    public void setI(int i) {
        this.i = i;
    }

IS everyone see that there is not getter for 'i' - we have getter for 
'j'. But compiler will not fix this error, because it is a logical 
error, not language.


Ruslan.