i suppose that we could add another method which behaves as per the jsp spec. should be pretty simple to write (just remove parameters from the map). i don't know structs well enough to know whether this would be useful or not.
- robert On Thursday, September 26, 2002, at 03:43 AM, Craig R. McClanahan wrote: > > > On Wed, 25 Sep 2002, Scott Sanders wrote: > >> Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2002 19:41:53 -0700 >> From: Scott Sanders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Reply-To: Jakarta Commons Developers List <commons- >> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: Jakarta Commons Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Subject: RE: Design question on BeanUtils.populate() >> >>> Although <jsp:setProperty> was one of the inspirations that >>> led to the creation of BeanUtils.populate(), I chose not to >>> slavishly copy the JSP semantics -- in particular the very >>> very wierd handling of zero-length Strings. I found it much >>> more useful in typical form fill-in scenarios to deal with >>> cases like this: >>> * Form is displayed with a non-zero-length string value >>> * User erases all the characters in the String (assumes an >>> optional field) >>> * When submitted, the corresponding bean property is changed >>> to a zero length String >>> >>> The JSP semantics would fail to operate as expected in such a scenario >>> >>>> Q. Is this going to be changed? >>> >>> I would -1 such a proposal. >>> >>>> Q. Assuming above answer is no, why? >>>> >>> >>> Backwards compatibility. Every Struts-based app in the world >>> depends on the current behavior implicitly, so changing it >>> would break them all. >>> >> >> I would also tend to agree. The jsp: semantic is brain dead. Sun, can >> you hear this? :) >> > > Of course ... but it's too late to change that semantic as well, for the > same reason :-). > > Craig > > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]. > org> > For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]. > org> > -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
