Rearranger problem

It appears that getters/setters aren't detected properly in interfaces,
even if I set up getter/setter detection to only look at the method
signature.

Cheers,
N.

2 comments
Comment actions Permalink

Thanks, Nathan, I'll look into it.

I'm currently redesigning the way getters and setters are defined. The current set of hardcoded choices is too limiting. The new design will allow global definition of arbitrary getter/setters, and individual rules can use any set of these definitions. Recognition of getter/setters will be based on regex pattern matching of the method signature and/or body.

I'm also planning to add the ability to use different rulesets based on the contents of the Java file, e.g. interface vs class, extends/implements names, or matching class/interface name to a pattern.

This is a fairly large reworking, so it has delayed minor (bug fix) releases. Sorry for the delay, folks, but I hope you find it worthwhile.

-Dave

0
Comment actions Permalink

Great Dave, thanks!

N.

Dave Kriewall wrote:

Thanks, Nathan, I'll look into it.

I'm currently redesigning the way getters and setters are defined. The current set of hardcoded choices is too limiting. The new design will allow global definition of arbitrary getter/setters, and individual rules can use any set of these definitions. Recognition of getter/setters will be based on regex pattern matching of the method signature and/or body.

I'm also planning to add the ability to use different rulesets based on the contents of the Java file, e.g. interface vs class, extends/implements names, or matching class/interface name to a pattern.

This is a fairly large reworking, so it has delayed minor (bug fix) releases. Sorry for the delay, folks, but I hope you find it worthwhile.

-Dave

0

Please sign in to leave a comment.