[Grok-dev] Re: Fields inner class support removed in branch
faassen at startifact.com
Fri Sep 14 09:55:53 EDT 2007
Luciano Ramalho wrote:
> Thanks for this, Jan!
> I will add this idiom to the doctests.
Note that I personally am not a big fan of this idiom. Various reasons:
* I like simple attributes instead of properties as they just make
reasoning about the code easier. Of course properties are cool, but in
* If a form is used, validation of the field will happen twice: when the
form is submitted, and then again when the data is set. This seems
* a vague dynamic typing feeling: I don't want my runtime to do a lot of
checks - if I really want to set a property to "foo" I should be able to
do it, even if the field doesn't allow it. This isn't very well
reasoned, but I got the impression in the past that sometimes it can be
limiting to the programmer.
This is mostly a personal choice though. I don't think we should
overemphasize this feature, as in having a culture of "You should be
using FieldProperty in your code, you horrible heathen!". I'm fine with
offering it as a sometimes useful option to programmers though.
More information about the Grok-dev