[jboss-cvs] Re: jboss-cvs-commits Digest, Vol 37, Issue 197

[Scott Stark]

The problem with "is" style getters is that it only applies to the 
primitive boolean type.

Boolean isX()
void setX(Boolean x)

does not define a read-write property X of type Boolean. This has burned 
me in setup of some management views where a property shows up with no 
read based on the mc BeanInfo. I personally like get/set as it has no 
such inconsistency.

Brian Stansberry wrote:
> If you prefer "is" I'll gladly change it. I'm curious why you care 
> though; does the MC handle "is" more cleanly?
>
> Regarding the javabeans spec, the only preference for "is" is that if 
> "is" and "get" both exist for a property, the property is read via "is".
>
> 8.3 Design Patterns for Properties
>   8.3.1  Simple properties
>          By default, we use design patterns to locate properties by 
> looking for methods of the form:
>             public <PropertyType> get<PropertyName>();
>             public void set<PropertyName>(<PropertyType> a);
>
> .....
>
>    8.3.2 Boolean properties
>          In addition, for boolean properties, we allow a getter method 
> to match the pattern:
>              public boolean is<PropertyName>();
>          This “is<PropertyName>” method may be provided instead of a 
> “get<PropertyName>” method, or it may be provided in addition to a 
> “get<PropertyName>” method.
>
>          In either case, if the “is<PropertyName>” method is present 
> for a boolean property then we will use the “is<PropertyName>” method 
> to read the property value.
>
>
> Ales Justin wrote:
>> Why is this not isOverrideDistributableManager(), as per javabeans?
>>
>>
>