Thanx!
Armin Waibel wrote:
Hi Bobby,
have a look at this
http://db.apache.org/ojb/docu/guides/advanced-technique.html#Change+PersistentField+Class
regards, Armin
Bobby Lawrence wrote:
I don't know if this is the correct place to ask, but...
Is it possible to tell OJB to call setter methods on the descriptor classes instead of attempting to get the field, calling myField.setAccessible(true), and calling the myField.set() method? This will enforce the practice of creating good JavaBeans with the proper accessor methods. It will also de-couple the names of the fields with the accessor methods.
At my organization, we try to keep everything consistent by conforming to a standard way of writing our Java objects.
We use the notation: _fieldName for private member variables.
I have a class with a String field called "_name" and getters/setters "getName/setName".
If I define my field descriptor as such:
<field-descriptor name="name" .... />
OJB throws an exception because the field "name" doesn't exist. Its called "_name".
Can I ask that OJB call the setter method instead of setting the field directly? I thought that OJB simply looked for a method
"get< field-descriptor-name with first letter in uppercase >/set< field-descriptor-name with first letter in uppercase >", but I guess it doesn't.
This might have already been implemented and I just don't know it. I am using OJB 1.0.1.
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- ---------------------------- Bobby Lawrence MIS Application Developer
Jefferson Lab (www.jlab.org)
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Office: (757) 269-5818 Pager: (757) 584-5818 ----------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
