A very nice tool
http://blog.stroep.nl/2009/04/as3-value ... ator-beta/

Thanks Philippe

Check out this little instruction video too:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/markknol/3451978609/
EDIT: sorry .. deprecated

Update
- simple autocompletion for types
- added function for getters/setters
- added function to pass variable in constructor
- some performance tweaks

http://projects.stroep.nl/ValueObjectGenerator/

Wow that seems incredibly lazy. The amount of work typing into the fields is almost exactly the same as just writing it by hand. I don't get it.

This tool can be handy. However something bugs me:


in the marked line, there can be a confusion between calling the getter and the constructor argument.

@CourseVector: Yes, It is for lazy people, but moslty its for people who doesnt want to type multiple times the same things. I created the tool to create fast this kind of class: You see? 5 variables and 5 types and they appear 4 times in the class. If you use a lot of VO's, this should be a little bit fast (I hope)

@IAP: What do you mean? Do you have conflicts with it? Any ideas for this?

Out of curiosity, why does it extend Sprite? If it's purely a value object wouldn't you want it extending nothing?

I don't want to extend a sprite, it was just for the example. In most cases I mostly don't want too extend something with a value object (maybe a ValueObject class with a toString or clone function). Anyway you could use this tool for multiple purposes, so an extend function could be handy.

I generally hate to use same names for class properties and function arguments. I know that scoping issues will eventually use the argument and not the class var, so from the compiler point of view it would be correct. But from the developer point of view it could be confusing.

By the way, It happened to me an infinite loop of calling getter instead of local var that eventually called the same getter....

updates
- automatic imports
- save function (to .as-file)
- inputfield for constructor parameters prefix. Thanks for the tip IAP, now we have the option to fix it. At some case (like; no getters/setters) I dislike to use the prefix, so that's why it is optional. I don't know if there is a code-standard definition for this?

Everyone has their own particular way of distinguishing when two variables would otherwise share the same name. In many cases I prefer to use "variable" and "this.variable" to distinguish them, but others certainly prefer to use casing or characters like underscores to make the delineation.

However, the language supports namespaces, which is what I use when distinguishing between an internal value and a public getter and setter. While logical names like "private" and "internal" are already reserved, I use the word "local" for my internal namespace. So here's an example of what that looks like:

Tool is updated again;

- better autocompletion
- improved interface