Community
Participate
Working Groups
With 3.0 arrived the ability to specify the code that should be generated for setter methods. Unfortunately this is not really suited for generation of setter methods for properties. Either better support for setter methods or new support for properties is wished for. E.g. I usually have the following code for my primitive properties. Properties with non-primitive types have a more complex setter, of cause. /* ========================================== */ /* <type>: <PropertyName> */ /** * The current <comment> */ private <type> my<PropertyName> = <init>; /** * Programmatic name of <code><PropertyName></code> property. * * <p>{@link java.beans.PropertyChangeEvent} signaled when property is changed. * * @see #set<PropertyName>(<type>) */ final public static String <PROPERTY_NAME>_PROPERTY = "<PropertyName>"; /** * Returns the current <comment> * * @return the <comment> */ public <type> get<PropertyName>() { return my<PropertyName>; } /** * Set the <comment> * * @param new<PropertyName> new <comment> */ public void set<PropertyName>(<type> new<PropertyName>) { <type> old<PropertyName> = my<PropertyName>; if (old<PropertyName> == new<PropertyName>) return; my<PropertyName> = new<PropertyName>; firePropertyChange(ORIENTATION_PROPERTY, old<PropertyName>, new<PropertyName>); }
Can you explain what exactly you have in mind here: "better support for setter methods", e.g. which additions would solve your problem?
[Sorry about the late answer... Vacation time...] Basically I would like eclipse to generate managed properties if wanted -- i.e. properties that will issue proper property change events when the value is changed. So: - "Add getter/setter" should allow me to tick a checkbox "Add managed properties" (or similar). - If this checkbox is not ticked the added code looks as today. - If this checkbox is ticked the added code should look like the set<prpertyName> from the original request: /** * Set the <comment> * * @param new<PropertyName> new <comment> */ public void set<PropertyName>(<type> new<PropertyName>) { <type> old<PropertyName> = my<PropertyName>; if (old<PropertyName> == new<PropertyName>) return; my<PropertyName> = new<PropertyName>; firePropertyChange(ORIENTATION_PROPERTY, old<PropertyName>, new<PropertyName>); } - If the <type> is not a primitive type (like boolean and int), the condition should be changed to if (new<PropertyName> == null ? (old<PropertyName> == new<PropertyName>) : new<PropertyName>.equals(old<PropertyName>)) return; - If the implementation class (or any base class) does not implement the needed firePropertyChange(...) method, the needed support methods should be added as well (possibly after a confirmation dialog). - The two versions of the setter method templates for primitive type and Object types can be handled via two different templates. Does this answer you question?
Yes.
Marking as LATER since this is currently not planned for 3.1.
Get rid of deprecated state.
