Hi, I started to use this, it really make the code clean, however GenerateAccessors does not sound right in the class, @Property is definately better, other languages use this too, borland's Pascal uses property to mean almost the same thing, might be nice to have this in the 5.0.11.
A.C. nirvdrum wrote: > > 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 > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/T5%3A-adding-accessors-back-to-corelib-components--tp15857551p15865307.html Sent from the Tapestry - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
