Do you think in terms of extending the existing "prop:" binding, or adding a "scala:" binding as well?
It would be interesting to get this convention implemented inside Tapestry IOC, inside the PropertyAccess service, which would allow it to be used by the BeanEditForm, Grid and pretty much everywhere else ... in which case, no changes to prop: would be necessary. As long as it is tested and documented, I don't see it causing any harm. For read only properties, the prop: binding support explicit method names, so you can say: prop:foo.bar().baz().biff This was implemented mostly for Collection.size(), etc. On 6/24/07, Marcus Schulte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I think, it would be nice, if the prop-binding, especially in T5, would support the scala flavour of getter and setter methods. That would mean that, as an alternative to int getX(), setX(int x), int x() and x_$eq(int x), would be recognised as valid accessors to the property "x". What do you think? -- Marcus Schulte http://marcus-schulte.blogspot.com
-- Howard M. Lewis Ship TWD Consulting, Inc. Independent J2EE / Open-Source Java Consultant Creator and PMC Chair, Apache Tapestry Creator, Apache HiveMind Professional Tapestry training, mentoring, support and project work. http://howardlewisship.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
