My responses are interspersed. > Daffin, Miles (Company IT) wrote: > > What do people feel about using constants for property names? > > I can't really see the point. A property name is like a > variable name, it will never be displayed or localized, so > why would you ever want to change it? e.g. Refactor --> rename. (Do you always get it right first time?) e.g. Misspelling a property name. How would you tell you had until you get a run time error of some kind? (String literal constants are evil.) > > <html:text property="<%=Keys.Section0.APPLICANT_NAME%>"/> > > Can you think of a case where this value won't be "applicantName"?
I think you have missed my point, such as it was. The property name here is defined by the bean. To ensure I don't misspell it I can use a constant. This makes it easier to maintain the property: rename or remove. > > - jstl tags > > - xml files (e.g. struts-config, validation) > > Worse: if you have an ActionForm, you can't have a property > whose name depends on a constant!! And what about getters and setters. What do you mean by 'depends on a constant'? ActionForms have properties. These have names. These names are used in many places: java, jsp, xml. > > Should I forget about defining > > constants? > > Yes :) I am unconvinced. -Miles -------------------------------------------------------- NOTICE: If received in error, please destroy and notify sender. Sender does not waive confidentiality or privilege, and use is prohibited. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
