Re: setObject( ), getObject( )

2008-10-21 Thread Scott Swank
However setObject() doesn't work as well on AbstractReadOnlyModel as
it does on Model, which is particularly important for immutable
backing objects such as Strings.

On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 2:35 AM, Johan Compagner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 we have also AbstractReadOnlyModel for that
 so igor are you sure you dont want to have Model final? :)


 On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 5:02 PM, Igor Vaynberg [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:

 whenever there is something nonfinal people will always find a way to
 misuse it.

 model methods are not final because it gives you a simple base class
 to subclass instead of starting from scratch with an imodel.

 -igor

 On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 6:37 AM, Ricky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  Hi,
 
  Is there any reason getObject and setObject were not made final in Model
  class? the reason why i am asking is that there might be the case when
  people misuse this; for example (and i have seen this at my current
  workplace);
 
 Model xModel = new Model(new Long(1)) {
 
 @Override
 public Object getObject() {
 // return super.getObject(); -- not calling this, instead
 i
  return null
 return null;
 }
 };
 
 // some lines afterwards ... i need this model ... i use it
  (expecting to get back object i set)
 // instead i get null. Original intent was to set object passed in
  and get the same thing ...
 System.out.println(xModel.getObject());
 
  Here i get null as the result.
 
  Any suggestions?
 
  Regards
  Vyas, Anirudh
 

 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]




-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: setObject( ), getObject( )

2008-10-21 Thread James Carman
On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 11:02 AM, Igor Vaynberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 whenever there is something nonfinal people will always find a way to misuse 
 it.

 model methods are not final because it gives you a simple base class
 to subclass instead of starting from scratch with an imodel.

Right.  I've done this before myself.  So, -1 (non-binding of course)
from me for making Model final (or making the methods final).
Besides, it breaks binary compatibility.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



setObject( ), getObject( )

2008-10-20 Thread Ricky
Hi,

Is there any reason getObject and setObject were not made final in Model
class? the reason why i am asking is that there might be the case when
people misuse this; for example (and i have seen this at my current
workplace);

Model xModel = new Model(new Long(1)) {

@Override
public Object getObject() {
// return super.getObject(); -- not calling this, instead i
return null
return null;
}
};

// some lines afterwards ... i need this model ... i use it
(expecting to get back object i set)
// instead i get null. Original intent was to set object passed in
and get the same thing ...
System.out.println(xModel.getObject());

Here i get null as the result.

Any suggestions?

Regards
Vyas, Anirudh


Re: setObject( ), getObject( )

2008-10-20 Thread Igor Vaynberg
whenever there is something nonfinal people will always find a way to misuse it.

model methods are not final because it gives you a simple base class
to subclass instead of starting from scratch with an imodel.

-igor

On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 6:37 AM, Ricky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Hi,

 Is there any reason getObject and setObject were not made final in Model
 class? the reason why i am asking is that there might be the case when
 people misuse this; for example (and i have seen this at my current
 workplace);

Model xModel = new Model(new Long(1)) {

@Override
public Object getObject() {
// return super.getObject(); -- not calling this, instead i
 return null
return null;
}
};

// some lines afterwards ... i need this model ... i use it
 (expecting to get back object i set)
// instead i get null. Original intent was to set object passed in
 and get the same thing ...
System.out.println(xModel.getObject());

 Here i get null as the result.

 Any suggestions?

 Regards
 Vyas, Anirudh


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]