Laurie Harper
Wed, 28 Jun 2006 14:42:04 -0700
L. Ian Roughley wrote:
I'd be up for lifting the restriction, but I also don't have access to the code./Ian Bob Lee wrote:Thanks for the explanation. What a silly restriction. Anybody up for removing it? I don't have access to the OGNL source. Bob On 6/27/06, Ian Roughley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:I've come across this also, and the way I explained it was that it had something to do with matching getters and setters to be well formed java beans. Although I never took the time to look into it further. /Ian Bob Lee wrote: > I've run into this problem with OGNL where I want it to invoke a > setter, but > if there's a getter method with the same property name but a different > type, > OGNL will just fail silently. Why does it even care about the getter? > Anyone > have an idea of what's going on here? > > I'm working against the OGNL version that went out w/ WW 2.2.2. > > Bob > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]