On 10/9/06, Clinton Begin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Only two reasons:
1) Performance. At the time (not sure about now) ClassInfo was much faster
than BeanUtils.
Understood. I wasn't suggesting that iBATIS should use BeanUtils, it
was just an example of extending JavaBeans while maintaining
compatibility.
2) More important -- I never thought in a million years anyone would ever
touch that nightmare of an API ... BeanInfo.
Seriously...I would strongly recommend you avoid that stuff. You're
wandering a path full of complexity and verbosity with very little benefit.
Don't fall for "Sun Standards". I did, and iBATIS is worse for it.
I haven't, but I think the JavaBeans standard is actually much more
pervasive than most folks realize, especially in the J2EE world (and
no, I'm not confusing JavaBeans with EJB). I won't claim to have seen
widespread use of the BeanInfo facilities though.
How about the possibility of plugging-in custom Probe/ProbeFactory
impls? I'm assuming that would be a feature request?
Cheers,
Clinton
Thanks for the feedback.
On 10/9/06, Kris Schneider <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Not sure if this should be a dev list discussion, but I'll start it
> here and see where it leads...
>
> I guess I never realized this, but iBATIS doesn't seem to honor
> BeanInfo classes. For example, given this class:
>
> public class Foo {
> private String name;
> public String name() { return this.name; }
> public void name(String name) { this.name = name; }
> }
>
> and its BeanInfo:
>
> import java.beans.*;
> import java.lang.reflect.*;
> public class FooBeanInfo extends SimpleBeanInfo {
> private static final Class BEAN_CLASS = Foo.class;
> public PropertyDescriptor[] getPropertyDescriptors() {
> PropertyDescriptor[] props = null;
> try {
> Method nameReadMethod =
BEAN_CLASS.getDeclaredMethod("name", null);
> Method nameWriteMethod =
> BEAN_CLASS.getDeclaredMethod("name", new Class[] {
String.class });
> props = new PropertyDescriptor[] { new
> PropertyDescriptor("name", nameReadMethod, nameWriteMethod) };
> } catch (NoSuchMethodException ignore) {
> } catch (IntrospectionException ignore) {
> }
> return props;
> }
> }
>
> com.ibatis.common.beans.ClassInfo reports that the bean
has a single,
> read-only property called "class". However, java.beans.Introspector
> reports that it has a read/write property called "name". Was there a
> reason to ignore the existing JavaBeans framework and implement custom
> introspection? I can understand the need to extend the core JavaBeans
> framework to support features like List-based indexed properties or
> mapped properties, but that can be done without breaking
> compatibility. For example, Jakarta Commons BeanUtils implements both
> of those previously mentioned features, but also honors BeanInfo.
>
> In addition, if someone wanted to override the current implementation,
> I don't see a way to plug in a different Probe/ProbeFactory. Is there
> any way to do that?
>
> Thanks.
>
> --
> Kris Schneider <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--
Kris Schneider <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
