On 05/18/2012 02:45 AM, Adrian Crum wrote:
> On 5/18/2012 5:50 AM, Adam Heath wrote:
>> On 05/17/2012 12:23 PM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:
>>> file are attached; that bug tracker is really awful.
>>
>> This is all becoming very troubling.
>>
>> == example methods
>> String a(String name, List list) {}
>> String a(String name, Map map) {}
>> String a(Object[] args) {}
>>
>> String b(String name, List list) {}
>> String b(String name, Map map) {}
>> String b(Object... args) {}
>>
>> == example templates
>> ${object.a(string, null)}
>> ${object.b(string, null)}
>>
>> ==
>>
>> In 2.3.18, freemarker can't find any methods at all. In 2.3.19, it
>> can find the b vararg method. In either situation, that is wrong.
>>
>> The correct situation for both is to say there are 2 matching
>> methods, the List and Map variants. Without my patch, when a null
>> is used, any non-primitive method will never be considered as a
>> possible candidate.
>>
>> I'm still discussing with freemarker upstream, but I get the feeling
>> that they won't provide a fix for the 2.3 branch, and a true,
>> correct fix for 2.4 will be long in coming.
>>
>> This means we need to come up with a workaround for ofbiz. I'm up
>> for suggestions. We really can't undo the change, that just doesn't
>> seem right to me.
>> .
>
> In my experience with FreeMarker, there are a lot of things that are
> replaceable - like TemplateLoader and TemplateExceptionHandler. Does
> FreeMarker have a "Object Method Resolver" that we can replace? Would
> a custom BeansWrapper help?
I'm currently in discussion with upstream(1), they may give me commit
rights after I sign a CLA.
Their suggestion right now is a new property on BeansWrapper.
1:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=3527625&group_id=794&atid=100794#
