Announcement Announcement Module
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Spring RCP property naming convention vs. PropertyUtils Page Title Module
Move Remove Collapse
X
Conversation Detail Module
Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Spring RCP property naming convention vs. PropertyUtils

    Hi, we're using Spring RCP to manage forms in the Swing-based side of our UI. However, we also use Struts and Common Controls to manage forms, tables, etc., in the Web-based side of our UI. Both UIs are configurable through XML using the names of the bound properties. However, I'm running into an inconsistency between the two because Struts and Common Controls (and many other toolkits) use PropertyUtils for properties and Spring RCP uses the Spring facilities. For nested properties everything is consistent. However, for mapped properties, things don't seem to work the same. For example, if I have an object bearing the interface:

    Code:
    public interface IMyObject {
        public Map getMappedData();
        public Object getMappedDataValue(String key);
    }
    then in PropertyUtils I can use the property:

    Code:
    myObject.mappedDataValue(key)
    but in Spring RCP it seems I have to use:

    Code:
    myObject.mappedData[key]
    While this doesn't seem terribly important, it does lead to inconsistencies in the format of properties used in the configuration files. Is there any way to configure Spring RCP to use PropertyUtils for its bean access strategy, or can its existing facilities be made to support the PropertyUtils syntax?

    Thanks,
    Scott

  • #2
    This is really Oliver's area of expertise. But, just off the top of my head, I seem to remember that Spring-rich uses some "property accessor" type interface when accessing properties. If so, then it should just be a matter of providing an alternate implementation of the interface. Of course, it's going to take some digging to figure out the details.

    - Andy

    Comment

    Working...
    X