Victor,
Alternatively, you could write a custom Clazz for you class, which
would recognize getDeclaredFields() as the read method for the property
"fields".
Are you seriously thinking about using Clazz? Do you think it deserves
to have a release? I am morally ready to do a release as long as there
is support for it.
- Dmitri
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I was just playing around with Clazz (thinking about replacing my
> horrible
> own hack)
> and stumbled across the following. I have a class that contains a
> method
>
> addFoo(Foo foo)
>
> but not getFoos() or setFoos(List list)
>
> so Foo is not considered a property because of the following code in
>
> ReflectedListPropertyParseResults#checkConsistency:
>
> if (readMethodParseResults == null && getMethodParseResults
> ==
> null){
> return false;
> }
>
> is this a deliberate decision? Can I not have write-only properties?
> I know this sounds strange, but in this case my add-method is
> "addField(MetaField field)" which adds a field to a MetaClass and the
>
> corresponding getter is getDeclaredFields() (to make it
> distinguishable
> from getAllFields()).
> For now I will create a method getFields() and document that this is
> the
> same
> as getDeclaredFields().
>
> I was just being curious.
>
> On a side note: I think it will be quite difficult to add something
> (e.g. a
> new
> method parser) to Clazz without a very good documentation.
>
> Regards
> Victor
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
