i didn't say that's fine. it's clearly not. i was just pointing out there's another side to this argument because java's protection attributes are so coarse grained. by not supporting this feature, some classes which otherwise would have all implementation details private would be forced to make those details public JUST to allow wicket to update the model. this may be the java way at present, but it's not "fine" either. this is why i suggested a switch to turn this on rather than just abandoning the feature. it's basically a no-win situation where you can choose your poison. i'm just advocating that we let people make that choice for themselves.
Eelco Hillenius wrote: > >> i think your argument is willfully slanted. generic manipulation and >> persistence can be good reasons to reach into an implementation which >> otherwise does not wish to expose properties or fields at all. i >> personally >> prefer objects that keep all these details private. i would hope that >> private accessor methods took precedence over private fields, but >> given that, i think accessors in general are best avoided and it's not >> necessarily good to expose private details simply to allow them to >> be manipulated by a framework such as spring, wicket or hibernate. >> that said, i think the real root of this problem is that java simply >> fails to adequately express the protection attribute granularity that's >> required here. being able to define new protection attributes that >> limit the visibility of details based on the package (and possibly other >> details like the thread group) of the caller would be the best way and >> at the present time quite impossible. > > As much as I agree with you in general, in this particular case, we > provide direct access to private members where you normally (using > straightforward Java/ no introspection) wouldn't have it. > Theoretically, this could result in people accessing those members > directly where they shouldn't. Even if you think that's fine, I doubt > whether this is something Wicket should support. > > Eelco > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express > Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take > control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. > http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ > _______________________________________________ > Wicket-user mailing list > Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/access-to-private-fields-tf4038948.html#a11475120 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ _______________________________________________ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
