I like the name @Property better . . . maps better to the language-level construct of properties. @GenerateAccessors, while descriptive, is verbose.
I think what be even better is support in the var prefix for arbitrary data types. I'm hoping with OGNL support forthcoming that this can be achieved. Then properties that only exist as temporary values for components can be yanked from the class altogether. -- Kevin On 3/5/08 8:59 PM, "Howard Lewis Ship" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Just struck me, would @Property be a better name for the annotation > than @GenerateAccessors? > > On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 4:47 PM, Christian Edward Gruber > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I hear you. I'm hoping to use this all over the place now, since most >> accessors are boilerplate. Always hated them... or rather the manual >> creation of them. >> >> Christian. >> >> >> On 5-Mar-08, at 16:22 , Howard Lewis Ship wrote: >>> >>> I just got a little greedy about removing code and raising the code >>> coverage % a little. :-) >>> >>> Stuck at 93% isn't too bad, though. >>> >> >> >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
