Content deleted Content added
Gnomingstuff (talk | contribs) rv 2007 test edit |
|||
| (8 intermediate revisions by 6 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
{{WikiProject
{{WikiProject Java|importance=mid}}
}}
== Layman's terms ==
Line 6 ⟶ 7:
:: What the hell kind of layman looks up an article like this and doesn't at least know what a constructor is? [[Special:Contributions/72.227.165.191|72.227.165.191]] ([[User talk:72.227.165.191|talk]]) 04:09, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
I am just starting to learn Java and installed NetBeans 7 and don't know what a constructor is. Why would a layman know? I get statements in tutorials (from NetBean.org site) that say "put xxx code after the constructor" without showing the code of the constructor so I know where that is. [[Special:Contributions/24.23.254.32|24.23.254.32]] ([[User talk:24.23.254.32|talk]]) 03:31, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
::The article fails to say what a Bean ''is'', which is the main thing an encyclopedia article should do. I am familiar with objects and even with constructors, but listing properties is not the same as defining. If an abstract definition becomes too complicated, it may be helpful to give a (basic) example to the use of beans. [[User:Rbakels|Rbakels]] ([[User talk:Rbakels|talk]]) 08:19, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
== Link to COM ==
Line 23 ⟶ 25:
== Move?? ==
JavaBeans be moved to JavaBeans ??? Is there something I am missing? --[[User:Soumyasch|<
*'''Support''' move. -- [[User:Solipsist|Solipsist]] 12:47, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Line 69 ⟶ 71:
Should serializable classes have a line like "private static final long serialVersionUID = 7526471155622776147L;"
I think I read that the serialVersionUID should be declared for serializable classes. Is this different for beans? Just a thought.
== Reusability ==
Line 90 ⟶ 91:
:Yeah! Computer science – a world of boasting slogans, without any coherent terminology. I detest it too! [[User:Rursus|Rursus]] dixit. ([[User talk:Rursus|<span style="color: red; background: #FFFF80"><sup>m</sup><u>bork<sup>3</sup></u></span>]]!) 09:15, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
== History? ==
When were JavaBeans invented? Have there been any major modifications to the concept since then? [[User:RenniePet|RenniePet]] ([[User talk:RenniePet|talk]]) 02:25, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
== Incorrect ==
The first sentence states "JavaBeans are classes that encapsulate many objects into a single object (the bean)." I believe this is a really bad thing to say for three reasons:
There is no need for multiple objects to be involved in a JavaBean. A perfectly good example (though of little use) is
import java.io.Serializable;
public class JBExample implements Serializable {
public JBExample(){}
}
Also, though a class may "encapsulate many objects," it is usually the instances of classes one is more interested in. The encapsulation (or not) of objects directly in a class is irrelevant for being a bean.
Finally, if the actual intent was to speak of instances of a class: It is not only unnecessary to encapsulate many objects, it is also not sufficient to do so. Java objects may well encapsulate many other objects, but they need not be an instance of a JavaBean class to do so.
[[User:Randallbsmith|Randallbsmith]] ([[User talk:Randallbsmith|talk]]) 19:02, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
== Advantages/Disadvantages sections ==
I kind of feel like the advantages/disadvantages sections should be rewritten in a way that is more neutral. I don't feel it is neutral to label something as an advantage or disadvantage because theoretically, an advantage to one person could be a disadvantage to another. Somebody deleted the Disadvantages section [[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=856370013&oldid=850841617&title=JavaBeans|here]], and I think that content should be reinstated in a more neutral way. [[User:CLCStudent|CLCStudent]] ([[User talk:CLCStudent|talk]]) 18:40, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
| |||