Re: S2 2.1.8.1: Need custom decapitalization (or leniency similar to 2.1.6)

2009-11-27 Thread Robert Graf-Waczenski
The SOB you are talking about is a well-respected (and present) colleague of mine and our team backed the decision, so the fun (which i was not observing as you did) ends exactly here :-( Robert Bill Bohnenberger schrieb: What an amusing thread. It seems to me the only problem here is the

Re: [OT] Re: S2 2.1.8.1: Need custom decapitalization (or leniency similar to 2.1.6)

2009-11-27 Thread Robert Graf-Waczenski
I agree to your observation, Dave. Point well made. I would like to get a comment from you about my claim about backwards incompatibility, though. Robert Dave Newton schrieb: Robert Graf-Waczenski wrote: And, to tell the truth, our choice to use getmProperty() as accessor method naming

Re: [OT] Re: S2 2.1.8.1: Need custom decapitalization (or leniency similar to 2.1.6)

2009-11-27 Thread Robert Graf-Waczenski
Dave Newton schrieb: Robert Graf-Waczenski wrote: And, to tell the truth, our choice to use getmProperty() as accessor method naming pattern was a bad one originally but we lived with it since the beginning and are now being bitten in the behind :-) That about sums it up, I think. I'm

S2 2.1.8.1: Need custom decapitalization (or leniency similar to 2.1.6)

2009-11-26 Thread Robert Graf-Waczenski
Hi, we are currently in the process of evaluating if upgrading our app from Struts 2.1.6 to 2.1.8.1 is feasible. Currently it is not because various things stopped working, but i'll like to work on one of them at a time. We frequently (*very* frequently, actually) use property names such as

Re: S2 2.1.8.1: Need custom decapitalization (or leniency similar to 2.1.6)

2009-11-26 Thread Rafał Krupiński
Robert Graf-Waczenski pisze: Hi, [...] Since we (obviously) don't want to rename the myriads of getters/setters, i'd like to know if there is a way around this, maybe with a custom interceptor somewhere? Hi If the only problem is the number of methods to be changed, maybe you should

Re: S2 2.1.8.1: Need custom decapitalization (or leniency similar to 2.1.6)

2009-11-26 Thread Robert Graf-Waczenski
Hi, we do of course use a refactoring tool, but we are talking about a huge amount of methods. I'm not aware of a refactoring tool that would allow me to rename *all* methods in *one* step. Robert Rafał Krupiński schrieb: Robert Graf-Waczenski pisze: Hi, [...] Since we (obviously) don't

Re: S2 2.1.8.1: Need custom decapitalization (or leniency similar to 2.1.6)

2009-11-26 Thread Saeed Iqbal
I would think that is a feature of Struts that it requires proper OOP names. On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 8:01 PM, Robert Graf-Waczenski r...@lsoft.comwrote: Hi, we do of course use a refactoring tool, but we are talking about a huge amount of methods. I'm not aware of a refactoring tool that

Re: S2 2.1.8.1: Need custom decapitalization (or leniency similar to 2.1.6)

2009-11-26 Thread Paweł Wielgus
Hi Robert, maybe not in one step, but for sure it's pretty easy to do. Just look for public [^ ]+ get[a-z] regexp in your codebase, and eclipse will do the rest, plus there's a bonus, You don't need to change anything in your jsp files. Ant to be absolutely sure everything worked well simply run

Re: S2 2.1.8.1: Need custom decapitalization (or leniency similar to 2.1.6)

2009-11-26 Thread Robert Graf-Waczenski
Well, i was hoping for an interceptor-based solution. But since something like this apparently is unavailable, i'm going for the method renaming approach, which is tedious work because i'm only changing the classes that are used by the Struts2 part of our codebase. So a global search/replace

Re: S2 2.1.8.1: Need custom decapitalization (or leniency similar to 2.1.6)

2009-11-26 Thread Rafał Krupiński
On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 4:01 PM, Robert Graf-Waczenski r...@lsoft.com wrote: Hi, we do of course use a refactoring tool, but we are talking about a huge amount of methods. I'm not aware of a refactoring tool that would allow me to rename *all* methods in *one* step. jEdit should be powerful

Re: S2 2.1.8.1: Need custom decapitalization (or leniency similar to 2.1.6)

2009-11-26 Thread Rafał Krupiński
On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 4:41 PM, Robert Graf-Waczenski r...@lsoft.com wrote: approach, which is tedious work because [...] i have to go through each applicable class and refactor-rename each method. Please don't try to make us feel guilty :-) You'll get paid for this, we're not. In previous

Re: S2 2.1.8.1: Need custom decapitalization (or leniency similar to 2.1.6)

2009-11-26 Thread Robert Graf-Waczenski
Rafał Krupiński schrieb: On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 4:41 PM, Robert Graf-Waczenski r...@lsoft.com wrote: approach, which is tedious work because [...] i have to go through each applicable class and refactor-rename each method. Please don't try to make us feel guilty :-) You'll

Re: S2 2.1.8.1: Need custom decapitalization (or leniency similar to 2.1.6)

2009-11-26 Thread Bill Bohnenberger
What an amusing thread. It seems to me the only problem here is the arrogant SOB that decided to defy the Bean naming conventions. LOL. (No offense intended if he is present company :) With affection, Bill On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 8:31 AM, Robert Graf-Waczenski r...@lsoft.comwrote: Rafał

[OT] Re: S2 2.1.8.1: Need custom decapitalization (or leniency similar to 2.1.6)

2009-11-26 Thread Dave Newton
Robert Graf-Waczenski wrote: And, to tell the truth, our choice to use getmProperty() as accessor method naming pattern was a bad one originally but we lived with it since the beginning and are now being bitten in the behind :-) That about sums it up, I think. I'm assuming the naming