[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Log:
> Rewrite to support is<foo> boolean property introspection. So now it does
>
> getFoo
> isFoo
> getfoo
Argh, it should be Jons' job to cry out loudly that we _again_ change
the sematics of
#set ($bar = $foo.Bla)
is this really necessary just to be save two small letters? This may
introduce bugs into existing and working templates. Lots of stuff
surely has
public void setFoo(String xxx)
public String getFoo()
public boolean isFoo()
methods where implicit calling will now further confuse people. And
all with without having implicit casting between types.
Now you may be in the schizophrenic situation that before this checkin
this worked:
--- cut ---
#set ($foo = $bar.foo)
My foo is $foo
--- cut ---
and now it does not, just because I did call the getfoo() method in
the bar object which returned a String and now I call the hasFoo()
method which returns a boolean.
Ok, it may be "bad style in my object" but nevertheless, this is a
_semantic_ change which is IMHO a bad thing.
Can we please at least make this configureable with a switch.
BTW: I would very much prefer to make the template language a little
more "noisy". How about
$foo.<bar> for calling getBar()
$foo.[bar] for calling isBar()
;-) (ok, I shut up now. ;-) :-) )
Regards
Henning
--
Dipl.-Inf. (Univ.) Henning P. Schmiedehausen -- Geschaeftsfuehrer
INTERMETA - Gesellschaft fuer Mehrwertdienste mbH [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Am Schwabachgrund 22 Fon.: 09131 / 50654-0 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
D-91054 Buckenhof Fax.: 09131 / 50654-20
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
