On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 11:50:57 +1200, Simon Kitching <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [snip] > Are you saying that we could add a switch for "beanutils" or > "propertyutils" property setting, and that if someone enables the "check > property exists" feature, that we then force "propertyutils" to be used? >
Aren't there two orthogonal issues here? Checking for missing properties versus using BeanUtils.setProperties() versus BeanUtils.populate()? If we go the configuration route, we should provide configuration properties for both, with the defaults obviously set to enable the current behavior. I would not suggest that we use PropertyUtils.setProperties() for this rule, because it would give up the very useful conversions that are performed automatically -- for example, you would never be able to configure an int or double property from the incoming data, which is necessarily a String. Craig --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
