Re: [jsr-314-open] EL property accessor name Forgiveness / Flexibility
A setter method 'void' return value is a part of the JavaBean contract.
I guess that modification of the setter method pattern would also
confuse many other Java Bean libraries like apache-beanutils, some EJB
3.x containers and so on. I do not think what an one JSR specification
should violate any other, especially so wide used as JavaBeans are.
On 07/22/2009 04:07 AM, Pete Muir wrote:
I'm with Lincoln here - sounds like an obvious, easy, improvement
can
be made to EL here...
On 21 Jul 2009, at 23:12, Lincoln Baxter, III wrote:
> I just ran across this when using the Builder pattern in some Pojos
> -- each setter returns the current instance of the pojo to allow for
> chaining set-statements:
>
> Pojo pojo = pojo.setName("name").setValue(23);
>
> With setters implemented like so:
>
> public Project setName(final String name)
> {
> this.name = name;
> return this;
> }
>
> But JSF complains:
> javax.servlet.ServletException: javax.el.PropertyNotFoundException:
> /faces/page.xhtml @36,20 value="#{pageBean.pojo.name}": Property
> 'name' not writable on type java.lang.String
>
> It seems to me that this is a slightly harsh restriction. Is there
> anything we can/should do about this? Does anyone else feel it's
> worth mentioning?
>
> The obvious answer is to use dumb getter/setter methods, but in some
> cases that can be restrictive, and I like the idea of being more
> forgiving.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> --Lincoln