Naming of Getters and Setters

Arci · **Joined:** Fri Nov 18, 2005 3:55 pm **Posts:** 4

Hello guys!

I found one issue that I cant really follow... If you have a Property named "uProfile" for example (each string with upper-case at the second pos.) than the getters and setters have to be getuProfile & setuProfile instead of getUProfile & setUProfile. Is this right and intended??

suvendu · **Joined:** Mon Dec 11, 2006 12:54 am **Posts:** 14

If you are generating the getters and setters for a property like "uProfile" using an IDE, then its going to be getUProfile & setUProfile. This is as per convention and should be used like this.

max · **Posted:** Mon Jun 04, 2007 9:25 am

use "UProfile" if your property name is actually "UProfile" and not "uProfile" ;) (this is a consequence of a specifal handling in java bean spec/impl about saying that if the second letter is uppercase then it assumes the first one is too...for e.g. resolving getURL() correctly)

Arci · **Joined:** Fri Nov 18, 2005 3:55 pm **Posts:** 4

yes, exactly thats the issue! The generated files are OK by convention but NOT OK for hibernate! Hibernate throws an Exception if the methods are not named getuProfile & setuProfile. => Hibernate doesnt accept the correct method names...

So is this a bug or intended? If its intended, why does hibernate break with the naming convention here?

Arci · **Joined:** Fri Nov 18, 2005 3:55 pm **Posts:** 4

max wrote:

use "UProfile" if your property name is actually "UProfile" and not "uProfile" ;) (this is a consequence of a specifal handling in java bean spec/impl about saying that if the second letter is uppercase then it assumes the first one is too...for e.g. resolving getURL() correctly)

thx for the hint ;)

I cannot easily change the database. I'm reverse engineering an existing db... :( but i found a workaround for this problem in our generator.

max · **Posted:** Mon Jun 04, 2007 9:57 am

eh no it is not ok by convention ;)

anyhow i don't know what generator you are using but hibernate tools handles this correctly when reverse engineering - if it doesn't please file a bug report for it.