Skip to content

Getter und Setter ohne get and set Präfix

Die Engine Pi verwendet Getter und Setter ohne die üblichen get*() und set*() Präfixe.

Gründe

  • Die neue Java Record-Klasse erstellt automatisch Getter ohne get-Präfix
  • Weniger Schreibarbeit
  • Getter und Setter werden in der Autovervollständig (BlueJ Strg + Leertaste) untereinander angezeigt
  • Da unter Umständen viele Methoden mit get*() und set*() beginnen, ist es schwieriger die gewünschte Methode zu finden.
  • Auch in der Java Community sind Getters und Setters Anlass zur Diskussion1 2

Um zu verdeutlichen welche Methode Attributwerte gibt und welche Methode Attribute setzt, sind alle Getter- und Setter-Methoden in den javadocs mit den Annotationen Getter und Setter markiert.

Statt

Circle particle = new Circle(size);
particle.setBodyType(PARTICLE);
particle.setLayerPosition(2);
particle.setColor("red");
particle.setCenter(1, 1);
particle.setGravityScale(1);
particle.setLinearDamping(range(18, 22));
particle.setLayerPosition(-1);

kann dann geschrieben werden:

Circle particle = new Circle(size);
particle.bodyType(PARTICLE);
particle.layerPosition(2);
particle.color("red");
particle.center(1, 1);
particle.gravityScale(1);
particle.linearDamping(range(18, 22));
particle.layerPosition(-1);

Oder in Zusammenhang mit verketteten Methoden:

Circle particle = new Circle(size);
particle.bodyType(PARTICLE)
    .layerPosition(2)
    .color("red")
    .center(1, 1)
    .gravityScale(1)
    .linearDamping(range(18, 22))
    .layerPosition(-1);

  1. https://levelup.gitconnected.com/are-getters-and-setters-an-anti-pattern-c8cb5625ca8c

    Are Getters And Setters an Anti-Pattern?

    “Getters/Setters. Evil. Period.” — Yegor Bugayenko ↩

  2. https://www.reddit.com/r/java/comments/176io2n/are_record_style_getters_and_setters_idiomatic

    Are record style getters and setters idiomatic for wider use now?

    Its' been a while now since the introduction of records and the fieldName() getter syntax instead of getFieldName(). I've since seen a few projects start to slide to this style with POJOs or even service classes that expose some fields.

    I'm wondering if this is actually becoming the new idiom or not (with setters like fieldName(newValue) as well). I like it because it's less text to process when reading code so it's slightly faster for me, but I was also thinking about the possible ambiguity between setters, and if you wanted to have getters that have a selection parameter, but I think this would just be a case of having a more descriptive name or maybe switch to stating get just for those e.g. getFieldNameForSelection(selectionParam).

    I'm wondering what other arguments there are for, or against, this being the new idiom across the board, espcially since a lot of serialisation and deserialisation processes are now supporting this too, or do most java devs just hate this idea? ↩