Re: [again] AspectJ: solution to Java's repetitiveness? bean attributes

From:

Lew <noone@lewscanon.com>

Newsgroups:

comp.lang.java.help

Date:

Sat, 09 Aug 2008 09:22:21 -0400

Message-ID:

<-KGdncJZkv-TBwDVnZ2dnUVZ_tWdnZ2d@comcast.com>

thufir wrote:

It seems arcane, but there is a way to do away with the boilerplate of
getters and setters:

public class NewBean {
public final Property<Integer> x = PropertyImpl.create();
}

Which you use like this:
NewBean b = new NewBean();
b.x.set(5);
b.x.get();

Notice that PropertyImpl.create() is equivalent to writing:
new PropertyImpl<Integer>();
It just saves us the need from typing <Integer> twice.

https://bean-properties.dev.java.net/tutorial.html

It looks ok, a bit different, but ok to me. what do you guys think?

I think it's a lot of work for no benefit.

Actually, there is some benefit to using factory classes, but eliminating the
so-called "boilerplate" because you're too lazy to copy-and-paste it isn't
part of it.

It amazes me how much effort people will expend to avoid the type safety or
thread safety ("I figured out how to avoid the 'overhead' of
synchronization!") of idioms like the repetition of type (which, BTW, is not
always the same on both sides of the assignment!), or how they'll argue
against the inclusion of Javadoc comments, but then they'll use some even more
verbose (now you need a 'PropertyImpl' class as well as a 'Property' class -
now there's a reduction!) idiom or fail to take the care with their algorithm.

This kind of exercise is a futile attempt to turn Java into a language for
lazy whiners. Not a good thing.

--
Lew