We currently don't have plans to support generic getters and setters with the form/event-bean binding support. I am not sure how many people this would effect. We will be supporting the usual pattern of get* set* methods. Since CF 9 supports generating these by default seems like the recommend way to go in additional to being the technique I recommend people use when coding beans (aka plain old CFCs).
--Kurt On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 10:03 AM, Brian Pickens<[email protected]> wrote: > > Hmm, actually I see that the work required to do this probably isn't > close to worth it considering how easy It was to implement the > onMissingMethod to do this... :D > > On Jul 17, 5:08 pm, Brian Pickens <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi guys. I would like to make a suggestion if thats okay. I can create >> a ticket for it too if you guys think this idea merits that. >> >> Ever since 1.5 (i think) you have been adding support for binding >> event values to our beans, and now in 1.8 you are taking it a step >> even further with the new <form:form> tags. This is pretty cool I have >> to say. Now my suggestion is this: >> >> I am designing my latest model layer code to use a version of the IBO >> concept which I call a recordset. This class has all the benefits of a >> normal bean but includes cool functions for iterating and transforming >> whole recordsets as well as single records. I use this in lieu of >> switching between using normal beans for single records and plain >> queries for sets of records. The issue here is that because Recordset >> has not concept of a business entities properties ( it varies between >> entities obviously ), the set and get methods look like this: >> >> get("propertyname"); >> set("propertyname","propertyvalue); >> >> I thought that I would bring this up since the machII code nodoubtedly >> uses "setPropertyName("propertyvalue");". Now, I realize I can use the >> onMissingMethod() function to solve this problem, but I think it would >> be cool if the framework could support this method of using getters/ >> setters anyway. >> >> Please let me know what your guys thoughts are on this... > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to Mach-II for CFML list. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/mach-ii-for-coldfusion?hl=en SVN: http://greatbiztoolsllc.svn.cvsdude.com/mach-ii/ Wiki / Documentation / Tickets: http://greatbiztoolsllc.trac.cvsdude.com/mach-ii/ -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
