> I did think about it, and it's not logical. Why do I > want to lump getters > and setters together to fit some artificial notion of > a "property?" The > answer is I don't. I don't think there's a > justification for doing so that > matters to users, and there are plenty of reason for > a getter and setter to > respectively return and accept different types. OGNL > using Introspector and > Introspector exhibiting this behavior is not a good > reason. >
Well, unless we want to rewrite OGNL to not use the native reflection capabilities of JavaBeans, and write our own based on name patterns only, I think we're stuck with it. It's really not that bad. Rename either the getter or the setter. > Even if we did enforce this behavior purposefully, > failing silently is evil. > Well, yes... But if you have the dev mode on, it will log errors for web parameters that don't match bean properties. > > Bob > --------------------------------------------------------------------- Posted via Jive Forums http://forums.opensymphony.com/thread.jspa?threadID=35707&messageID=69908#69908 --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
