Re: [Clazz] class with "add*" but without get* or set*

2003-06-17 Thread Volle
Hi Dmitri, not yet sure, for me it is still a bit too complicated. If I have the *fealing* that I understand it and I can retain my higher level interfaces (to invoke the get/set/add methods) I really think about switching, because my own code became quite a mess in the meantime and I like the c

Re: [Clazz] class with "add*" but without get* or set*

2003-06-17 Thread Dmitri Plotnikov
Victor, Alternatively, you could write a custom Clazz for you class, which would recognize getDeclaredFields() as the read method for the property "fields". Are you seriously thinking about using Clazz? Do you think it deserves to have a release? I am morally ready to do a release as long as th

[Clazz] class with "add*" but without get* or set*

2003-06-16 Thread Victor . Volle
I was just playing around with Clazz (thinking about replacing my horrible own hack) and stumbled across the following. I have a class that contains a method addFoo(Foo foo) but not getFoos() or setFoos(List list) so Foo is not considered a property because of the following code in Refle