I see no problem in raising (but avoid re-raising) JIRA issues for things
that are "by design", since the design may be bad. In this case I think it
is. I certainly understand the reasoning behind it, but the problem is that
the validator(s) can't make informed decisions, based on the actual context
(mapping etc.).

/G

2012/2/27 cremor <[email protected]>

> > But can you explain (or point me to an explanation) - why is there a
> > requirement to have a setter for all properties?
> >
> > I've done most of my NH work with v2.1.2 (and FNH 1.0), and my entity
> > classes have dozens of "get-only" properties (mainly returning
> > calculated values, or simplified access to private members).  But now
> > that's all broken with NH 3.2.
>
> You shouldn't need setters for *all* properties, only for the ones
> which are mapped.
>
> Creating JIRA issues won't change anything since this is the new (by
> design) behaviour of NHibernate (there was already a lengthy
> discussion on the development list about this).
> As I've already said, it is very easy to get the old behaviour. Just
> inject you own DynProxyTypeValidator.
>
> On Feb 22, 5:02 pm, Tom Bushell <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Feb 21, 2:17 am, cremor <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > This was done because of lazy properties. Previously if you had a lazy
> > > property with private set, you would only get a error in the log which
> > > was very easy to miss. Now the validator complains about it so you
> > > can't miss it.
> >
> > I agree - that's better than a silent failure.
> >
> > But can you explain (or point me to an explanation) - why is there a
> > requirement to have a setter for all properties?
> >
> > I've done most of my NH work with v2.1.2 (and FNH 1.0), and my entity
> > classes have dozens of "get-only" properties (mainly returning
> > calculated values, or simplified access to private members).  But now
> > that's all broken with NH 3.2.
> >
> > This is a pretty common pattern in OO designs - I'd think this would
> > be a breaking change for a lot of people.
> >
> > -Tom Bushell
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "nhusers" 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/nhusers?hl=en.
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"nhusers" 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/nhusers?hl=en.

Reply via email to