Thanks Niall.
The original reason for grabbing the module prefix was to make the cache keys unique, so that two modules that both defined a form bean named "foo" (but perhaps with different properties) would not clash.
The approach you recommend seems reasonable, and accomplishes that same goal ... but if we're going to be a factory, we might as well be a factory for action form instances (as you suggest), so the FormBeanConfig method would be something like:
public ActionForm createActionForm(ActionServlet servlet)
instead. The dynamic create version would use the restored method signature in DynaActionFormClass (which the struts-faces library routine would still need to call in order to remain 1.1-compatible).
Does that sound right? If so, I'm +1 for such a patch, and will do so later tonight if you don't beat me.
It's been a few months since I was looking at form bean creation, but I'm pretty sure this is exactly what I thought would be a good idea as well; I think that i brought it up on the dev list looking for some encouragement -- at least, I think I would have been reluctant to just make the change without some discussion. (Maybe I neglected to bring it up.)
There was some discussion on the user list this week about making truly dynamic forms at run time, and this would serve that use case.
In short, I'm +1 on it.
Joe
--
Joe Germuska [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://blog.germuska.com "Imagine if every Thursday your shoes exploded if you tied them the usual way. This happens to us all the time with computers, and nobody thinks of complaining."
-- Jef Raskin
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
