> -----Original Message-----
> From: Leif Hanack [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2002 1:47 AM
> To: Tag Libraries Users List
> Subject: RE: jstl: expression language does not use interface?!!
>
>
>
> > If you don't want to let the user set information on an object with
> > <c:set>, it must not have setter methods. You can always wrap the
> > underlying object in a wrapper that provides only one-way
> access, but an
> > interface does not provide this protection.
>
> mmh?! thanks so fare. i'm a bit disappointed of EL concerning
> this pouint.
> even the usebean tag has a possibility to define a type of an object.
> why doesn't EL have?!
>
> i think the loss of using interfaces is a big disadvantage. on the
> serverside it will not be clear, why i have a class User with getter
> and setter and a User2 with just setter.
I disagree. I believe it's a huge advantage. It means that I don't have to
code server-side objects specifically for use with JSTL, and I don't have to
retrofit existing objects just to make them available to my JSTL page
authors.
--
Martin Cooper
>
> thanks, leif
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
