The client has a requirement that we must be able to sort haha instances based on their surnames.
Now update that definition so that `a.name` is a concatenation of `a.firstName` and `a.lastName`, I want to be able to continue using it as ` a.name` though. On 18 September 2010 09:30, Steel City Phantom <[email protected]> wrote: > > The longer version: > > > > I want to be able to write "a.name = foo" and not have to worry about > > implementing a getter and a setter until the day where I actually need > one. > > When I do, I just implement it and all clients automatically get > redirected > > through that getter/setter. > > you can implement that today in java. its very easy to do so as well, > heres how > > public class haha { > public String name; > } > > there, now you can do your a.name = foo. not very hard. now on your > refractoring issue, do you REALLY want a language to do your refractoring > for you? i certainly don't. i think this comes down to be VERY careful > what you wish for, you might just get it. > > > On Sat, Sep 18, 2010 at 4:22 AM, Reinier Zwitserloot > <[email protected]>wrote: > >> On Sep 18, 5:42 am, Cédric Beust ♔ <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > I think Lombok is a non-starter for a lot of organizations just because >> it's >> > basically its own compiler. >> > >> >> No it isn't. It's probably a nonstarter if you use IDEs other than >> Eclipse and NetBeans, sure, but, "its own compiler"? How so? The >> language grammar rules do not change. >> >> > The longer version: >> > >> > I want to be able to write "a.name = foo" and not have to worry about >> > implementing a getter and a setter until the day where I actually need >> one. >> > When I do, I just implement it and all clients automatically get >> redirected >> > through that getter/setter. >> >> I'm not sure why you find this so important. Why is "a.name = foo" so >> much nicer than "a.setName(foo)"? Doesn't this entire line of arguing >> boil down to: I get annoyed having to manually write "getX" and "setX" >> methods? In which case, sure, but if solving that problem makes one a >> higher level than java, then java+lombok is higher level, I guess. I'm >> not sure thats a particularly convenient definitoin for "higher level >> language" - then just about any feature of any kind means "higher >> level". We'd need a billion levels. >> >> > I would place this one out of scope. >> >> [That was about the term "property" including the idea of change >> listeners] >> >> Why? GUI libraries suck without such a feature. Its quite marvelous >> for any type of MVC design, really. >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "The Java Posse" group. >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> [email protected]<javaposse%[email protected]> >> . >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en. >> >> > > > -- > You want it fast, cheap, or right. Pick two!! > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "The Java Posse" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]<javaposse%[email protected]> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en. > -- Kevin Wright mail / gtalk / msn : [email protected] pulse / skype: kev.lee.wright twitter: @thecoda -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
