On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 3:10 PM, Rickard Öberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Niclas Hedhman wrote: >> On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 2:16 AM, Rickard Öberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> I've also changed so that now the property is actually set as mutable >>> during composite builder time. If you ask property.isImmutable() on an >>> immutable property when the source is a CompositeBuilder, the result >>> will be false. This properly ensures that the semantics are correct, and >>> that you can edit a composite in a UI with automatic detection of what >>> can be edited, and what cannot be edited. >> >> You mean if I pass a "stateFor()" template to an editor? >> >> That makes sense. But doesn't the client of composite builder >> sometimes need to know if the actual end result will be Immutable? >> >> Maybe like; >> builder.isImmutable( property ) ??? > > Well, with the current implementation, if you ask property.isImmutable() > you will get false, but property.metaInfo(Immutable.class) will return > the annotation, so you can actually differentiate between the two if you > really want to.
Ok, good enough if we get that documented... Cheers Niclas _______________________________________________ qi4j-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/qi4j-dev
