If the label attribute is not specified, the field name is used as the label. If the label attribute IS specified then SuperCSV looks for a getter/setter with that label name. If those getter/setter methods are created, there is no need for the label attribute since the getter/setter encapsulates the field anyway and the actual field could be named anything. What is the point of the label attribute if not to allow a column to be mapped to a field named something else? Getter/setter methods should be generated automatically based on annotations instead of allowing SuperCSV to look for missing accessor/mutator.
Okay, think I understand the purpose of this one. Still, disappointing that all the boilerplate get/set code is necessary since there is a bug when using public fields.
If the label attribute is not specified, the field name is used as the label. If the label attribute IS specified then SuperCSV looks for a getter/setter with that label name. If those getter/setter methods are created, there is no need for the label attribute since the getter/setter encapsulates the field anyway and the actual field could be named anything. What is the point of the label attribute if not to allow a column to be mapped to a field named something else? Getter/setter methods should be generated automatically based on annotations instead of allowing SuperCSV to look for missing accessor/mutator.