Hi Joost,
I've tested this several different ways and haven't seen any problem.
What makes you think that you need a public constructor in this case?
- Dennis
Joost Cassee wrote:
When I use a mapping for objects in a collection, like this:
<collection add-method="addFoo" item-type="Foo" usage="optional">
<structure name="foo" type="Foo"/>
</collection>
<mapping abstract="true" class="Foo" ordered="false">
...
</mapping>
A protected default constructor in class Foo seems to be enough.
However if I have a mapping like this:
<mapping abstract="true" class="Bar" ordered="false">
<structure name="foo" get-method="getFoo" set-method="setFoo"
usage="optional"/>
</mapping>
... then suddenly I need a public default constructor in Foo.
Why must the default constructor be public, when JiBX can work
perfectly well with private fields?
Regards,
Joost Cassee
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Power Architecture Resource Center: Free content, downloads, discussions,
and more. http://solutions.newsforge.com/ibmarch.tmpl
_______________________________________________
jibx-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jibx-users
