Interesting idea; though we still need an annotation when the name is not a valid java identifier and also can't find a good name to mark the exception case. Another issue is anyone who is not aware of convention can be surprised by it (e.g. developer renames a method and the method is no longer a js function).
Do you aware of any popular java lib that solves a similar problem by conventions so that I can take a look for ideas? On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 12:18 PM, Jörg Hohwiller < [email protected]> wrote: > Hi Goktug, > > nice approach. IMHO getters and setters should not be required to be > annotated by @JsProperty. Instead a method looking like a getter or > setter that is actually not a property accessor should be annotated > (Convention over configuration). > I would love to see this coming... > > Cheers > Jörg > > -- > http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "GWT Contributors" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > -- http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "GWT Contributors" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
