What's the equivalent of Java Beans in .net? [modified]
-
I'm not too familiar with java, but very familiar with .NET. What exactly is "Java Beans" anyway?
-Matt Newman
If you've ever done any MFC work, they are very similar to
CDialog-derived classes. They are in charge of comunicating with the UI components.
"A good athlete is the result of a good and worthy opponent." - David Crow
"To have a respect for ourselves guides our morals; to have deference for others governs our manners." - Laurence Sterne
-
I'm not too familiar with java, but very familiar with .NET. What exactly is "Java Beans" anyway?
-Matt Newman
I am a .net Developer and with best of my knowledge about java,beans are component which hold business logic and can be used as a supporting component for main executing programme and in .net this task is accomplished by assemblies ,which hold reusable business logic i hope this helps
-
If you've ever done any MFC work, they are very similar to
CDialog-derived classes. They are in charge of comunicating with the UI components.
"A good athlete is the result of a good and worthy opponent." - David Crow
"To have a respect for ourselves guides our morals; to have deference for others governs our manners." - Laurence Sterne
Beans do not imply UI. It's more like COM objects really.
-
Beans do not imply UI. It's more like COM objects really.
Joergen Sigvardsson wrote:
Beans do not imply UI.
They do for the specific Java project that I am currently working on.
"A good athlete is the result of a good and worthy opponent." - David Crow
"To have a respect for ourselves guides our morals; to have deference for others governs our manners." - Laurence Sterne
-
Joergen Sigvardsson wrote:
Beans do not imply UI.
They do for the specific Java project that I am currently working on.
"A good athlete is the result of a good and worthy opponent." - David Crow
"To have a respect for ourselves guides our morals; to have deference for others governs our manners." - Laurence Sterne
That's like saying "COM objects imply ActiveX, because they do for the project I am currently working on." :)
-
Recenlty I've been reading some articles about java beans. I wonder if there's an equivalent of Java Beans in .Net Framework and if the answer is yes what is it? -- modified at 9:18 Wednesday 8th August, 2007
Java beans are the equivalent of COM objects. They do not imply the presence of a GUI, business logic, databases, or whatever. The Java bean spec just says that you should be able to construct the object, initialize it through accessors (set/get), and be serializable. That's it.
-
That's like saying "COM objects imply ActiveX, because they do for the project I am currently working on." :)
The major Java GUI toolkits AWT, Swing, and SWT use JavaBeans for its components, which allows GUI editors like the Eclipse Visual Editor to maintain a hierarchy of components and to provide access to their properties via getters and setters.
"A good athlete is the result of a good and worthy opponent." - David Crow
"To have a respect for ourselves guides our morals; to have deference for others governs our manners." - Laurence Sterne
-
Recenlty I've been reading some articles about java beans. I wonder if there's an equivalent of Java Beans in .Net Framework and if the answer is yes what is it? -- modified at 9:18 Wednesday 8th August, 2007
-
Recenlty I've been reading some articles about java beans. I wonder if there's an equivalent of Java Beans in .Net Framework and if the answer is yes what is it? -- modified at 9:18 Wednesday 8th August, 2007
beatles1692 wrote:
I wonder if there's an equivalent of Java Beans in .Net Framework
Yes. As others pointed out EJB is different than JavaBeans. The most significant aspect of "JavaBean" is the standard getter/setter implementation that allows the various IDE's (Designers) to present developers with GUI tools (PropertyGrid in .NET) to setup the component in their application. To build an equivalent to a JavaBean in .NET you include Designer implementation for your component that you develop. You can find documenation and many articles about that on MSDN.
-
Joergen Sigvardsson wrote:
Beans do not imply UI.
They do for the specific Java project that I am currently working on.
"A good athlete is the result of a good and worthy opponent." - David Crow
"To have a respect for ourselves guides our morals; to have deference for others governs our manners." - Laurence Sterne
DavidCrow wrote:
Joergen Sigvardsson wrote: Beans do not imply UI. They do for the specific Java project that I am currently working on.
Don't be silly. The project I'm working on proves categorically that they imply translation of XML schemas to Java objects, and vice-versa. How could you not know that?