DISCUSSION: Bean/Data classes

[Marek Kozieł]

2009/3/25 Stephen Colebourne <scolebourne at joda.org>:
> Reinier Zwitserloot wrote:
>> You should move away from the idea of 'this keyword does so much
>> magic!' and move towards the idea that this keyword simply declares
>> that the class is to have bean semantics.
>
> I proposed almost exactly this 'data' class two years ago -
> http://www.jroller.com/scolebourne/entry/a_bean_keyword.
>
> public bean Person {
>     // properties
>     property String forename;
>     property String surname;
>
>     // normal fields and methods
>     private String ordinaryField;
>     public boolean validate() { ... }
> }
>
> This is fundamentally no different to how enum was slotted into the
> language (note I deliberately omitted the 'class' keyword.
>
> The key aspect of this approach is that it allows there to be different
> grammer rules within 'bean' classes to normal classes, just as there are
> different rules for 'enum' classes.
>
> Now, as for what exactly it generates, that is a much bigger question.
> Does it just generate getter/setter? What about lists, maps and arrays?
> How about events? The truth is that is where every property proposal
> gets bogged down (because server side JavaBeans are just data holders,
> whereas swing JavaBeans are much more a part of the application).
>
> So, will this be in Coin? No. There is way to much to work out.
>
> But this could be the best way to get a form of properties into Java.
> And a group could form to code up a prototype and prove it (Kijaro is
> available...)
>
> Finally, I should say that of all the things Java lacks, I think
> properties is the biggest - bigger than closures. The sheer amount of
> wasted effort, lines of code, lack of consistency and sheer focus on the
> low level detail rather than the high level abstraction is staggering.
> It is IMO a far bigger hole in writing good Java apps today than
> closures (or any other language proposal).
>
> Stephen
>
>

Sorry / to early send!

I agree that here is to 'much magic'.
What would you say about:

 public class Person {
     // properties
     property String forename;
     property String surname;

     private String ordinaryField;
     private static String some;

     public delegate(get) from forename, surname;

     public delegate(set) from forename, surname;

     private delegate(get,set) from ordinaryField;

     public static delegate(get) from some;
 }

-- 
Pozdrowionka. / Regards.
Lasu aka Marek Kozieł

http://lasu2string.blogspot.com/