I go for the check inside the validator ;) java.util.Set<String> looks odd
thx for feedback On 10/28/06, Adam Winer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
We should be able to support that. Of course, you have to write: java.util.Set<String>, 'cause it's XML... But, honestly, I don't know if that's really supported. You certainly should be checking inside the validator that the properties really are strings, since these things will get passed around via EL which is definitely *not* going to keep generic typesafety intact. -- Adam On 10/27/06, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hello, > > do we currently support something like > java.util.Set<String> > for <property-class> ? > > Or do I need to "check" inside my validator, when reading the > *Set-based* property? > > -M > > -- > Matthias Wessendorf > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh > > further stuff: > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com >
-- Matthias Wessendorf http://tinyurl.com/fmywh further stuff: blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
