On 7/26/05, Ed Griebel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I had this issue where class was getting populated. Since it was for > logging display, I didn't want the long class name displayed and ended > up removing 'class' from the map if it was in there. It's much easier > than defining (and agreeing on!) these "special" fields in an object. >
That seems like the right pragmatic answer. > The only change I could get behind is if there was a > "PropertyUtils.describePrimitives()" which would only return primitive > types and String, but this would have little usefulness because it's > so specific. You should note that PropertyUtils.describe() simply delegates to the standard JavaBeans introspection functionality to determine what the properties of the bean class are ... and, based on the property method naming rules, every Java class does indeed have a readonly property named "class" due to the existence of the getClass() method that is inherited from java.lang.Object. You should also note that you can dictate what the available properties are, and even use getter and setter method names that do not conform to the standard design patterns, if you supply a FooBeanInfo class to go along with your Foo class -- see the JavaBeans spec for more information. But that's more work than makes sense in this particular use case. > > -ed > Craig --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]