JDK 8 and properties

[Bruce Chapman]

On 6/10/2011 5:45 a.m., Loic Descotte wrote:
> Yes lombok-like features would be great
> It's a shame to be forced to use an external tool to do this :(

I am fairly certain that a lombok style solution can be made to work in 
a standard way. If that is the case, then it is not a language feature 
at all.

When I can drag myself away from the embedded development that is 
consuming more than a healthy proportion of both my mind and my time, I 
might have do a quick proof of concept. If someone else wants to have a 
go, I can point them in the direction I am thinking.

Bruce
>
> On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 6:29 PM, Rich Midwinter<rich.midwinter at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> You wouldn't need dot notation just to have generated getters/setters
>> though. http://projectlombok.org/features/GetterSetter.html
>>
>> Personally, I have no need for dot notation but do use lombok's @Data
>> frequently (even as a mostly server side guy). I'd have a slight preference
>> for having a similar solution ship with Java.
>>
>> Rich.
>>
>>
>> On 5 October 2011 17:11, Paul Benedict<pbenedict at apache.org>  wrote:
>>
>>> Here's my opinion... Properties brings its own issues. Part of Java's
>>> success is the readability of the language. If the dot notation is
>>> used for properties, readability diminishes because it is no longer
>>> apparent whether field access or method access is occuring.
>>>
>>> someObject.x = 1; // method call or field access?
>>>
>>> If another syntax is used, then I think it almost defeats the purpose
>>> of the proposal in the first place; it also begs the question how is
>>> that any "better" than simply calling the getter/setter directly.
>>>
>>> Paul
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 11:05 AM, Loic Descotte<loic.descotte at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> About Alex Miller answer,
>>>>
>>>> The consensus was not there at the beggining for lambdas, but it worked
>>>> (even if it was hard, I admit)
>>>>
>>>> For the second point, I work on server side but properties are important
>>> to
>>>> me :)
>>>> And a lot of people I know feel the same.
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 5:26 PM, Mark Thornton<mthornton at optrak.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>> On 05/10/11 16:15, Loic Descotte wrote:
>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I was wondering if coin 2 (in JDK 8) would possibly include a
>>>>> "properties"
>>>>>> feature, to avoid writing getters and setters for all fields in our
>>>>> classes.
>>>>>>
>>>>> The second answer (from Alex Miller) probably still applies
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/710266/why-will-there-be-no-native-properties-in-java-7
>>>>> Mark Thornton
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Loïc Descotte
>>>> 4 rue Joseph Fourier
>>>> 38000 Grenoble
>>>>
>>>> 06 23 23 36 80
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>