[jala-dev] Re: AW: Further feedback on jala.Form

  • From: <tobias.schaefer@xxxxxx>
  • To: <jala-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 10 May 2007 16:26:47 +0200

> The current behaviour is imo easy to grasp: either you define a
> getter/setter for a component, or the component will look for a
> property with the component's name in the data object. So i'd vote to
> keep it that way.   

Please don't ignore real-case scenarios where this means a real overhead. I 
could reduce in fact twenty lines per form definition in my current code if 
this was possible, which would make the whole form structure much more cleaner 
and easier to comprehend.


Other related posts: