Hi, Mike. In that case I misunderstood your example code. This ToStringBuilder seems to do what I coded myself.
I'll eventually try that and maybe switch over. Hiran ----------------------------------------- Hiran Chaudhuri SAG Systemhaus GmbH Elsenheimer Straße 11 80867 München Phone +49-89-54 74 21 34 Fax +49-89-54 74 21 99 > -----Original Message----- > From: Mike Stanley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Donnerstag, 7. Oktober 2004 15:06 > To: Struts Developers List > Subject: RE: Proposed Action base class change > > wait a sec, I'm slightly confused. > > How is this static method different from your static method? > Indeed, ToStringBuilder (as the name implies) assists in > writing the toString method, but it also provides utility > methods for representing objects as strings. There is no > restriction on where it is used (it does not neccessarily > need to be you toString method). > > i.e. I have an object instance 'myObject'. The class uses > the default Object.toString method. I can then log myObject > with either: > > log.debug(myObject) - which would output the default class > name / hash code id > > or > > log.debug(ToStringBuilder.reflectionToString(myObject)) - > which outputs the class [ parameter = value, ... ] format. > > I thought this is what you said your utility class did. > Perhaps I misunderstood. > > - Mike > > On Thu, 2004-10-07 at 09:50, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > Hi, Mike. > > > > Indeed I have not had a look at that class. But then, the > ToStringBuilder makes it easier to write the toString method, > while my approach saves me completely from writing it. > > > > Thanks for the hint anyway. > > > > Hiran > > > > ----------------------------------------- > > Hiran Chaudhuri > > SAG Systemhaus GmbH > > Elsenheimer Straße 11 > > 80867 München > > Phone +49-89-54 74 21 34 > > Fax +49-89-54 74 21 99 > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Mike Stanley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Sent: Donnerstag, 7. Oktober 2004 14:41 > > > To: Struts Developers List > > > Subject: RE: Proposed Action base class change > > > > > > <snip> > > > > With the static method I can apply my toString > > > implementation to any object that comes along - just what > you need > > > for debugging. I just wonder why the Apache > commons-beanutils does > > > not provide such a method, and someone mentioned it might be in > > > commons-lang, but I could not find that either. > > > > > > http://jakarta.apache.org/commons/lang/apidocs/org/apache/comm > > > ons/lang/builder/ToStringBuilder.html#reflectionToString(java. > > > lang.Object) > > > > > > String objString = ToStringBuilder.reflectionToString(object); > > > > > > - Mike > > > > > > > > > > > Hiran > > > > > > > > ----------------------------------------- > > > > Hiran Chaudhuri > > > > SAG Systemhaus GmbH > > > > Elsenheimer Straße 11 > > > > 80867 München > > > > Phone +49-89-54 74 21 34 > > > > Fax +49-89-54 74 21 99 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > Sent: Donnerstag, 7. Oktober 2004 14:22 > > > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > Subject: RE: Proposed Action base class change > > > > > > > > > > Another fair point. :) > > > > > > > > > > Well, that's the reason I put the idea out there... I > > > can't think of > > > > > every possible angle to look at it from... If I thought I > > > could, I > > > > > wouldn't need to solicit opinions in the first place. > > > > > > > > > > Kind of depressing though... I'm trying to contribute, but so > > > > > far all my ideas have been shot down (but for good reasons, > > > so I'm not > > > > > bitter about it). Just have to keep trying I suppose. :) > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > Frank W. Zammetti > > > > > Founder and Chief Software Architect Omnytex Technologies > > > > > http://www.omnytex.com > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, October 7, 2004 8:56 am, > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: > > > > > > Hi, Frank. > > > > > > > > > > > > I do not agree. While in most cases it is desireable to see > > > > > inside a > > > > > > bean (hence I created my > > > > > > public static String toString(Object bean) method), > > > > > there are times > > > > > > when I just have to make sure a bean is not just > equal but the > > > > > > same instance. > > > > > > The java.lang.Object.toString() methods allows me to that > > > > > > quite quickly as the memory address is printed. > > > > > > > > > > > > Unless you have another way to provide that > information, I'd > > > > > > rather stick with the default toString() plus some utility > > > > > toString(Object) > > > > > > method. The impact for you is not too much. What you > > > code so far is: > > > > > > log.debug("mybean="+mybean); > > > > > > and you'd have to change that to > > > > > > log.debug("mybean="+BeanUtil.toString(mybean)); > > > > > > which will allow you to either see the memory address or > > > > > the contents, > > > > > > whatever you prefer. > > > > > > > > > > > > Hiran > > > > > > > > > > > > ----------------------------------------- > > > > > > Hiran Chaudhuri > > > > > > SAG Systemhaus GmbH > > > > > > Elsenheimer Stra?e 11 > > > > > > 80867 M?nchen > > > > > > Phone +49-89-54 74 21 34 > > > > > > Fax +49-89-54 74 21 99 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > > > > > >> From: Frank W. Zammetti [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > >> Sent: Donnerstag, 7. Oktober 2004 13:43 > > > > > >> To: Struts Developers List > > > > > >> Subject: Re: Proposed Action base class change > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Hi Niall, > > > > > >> > > > > > >> I certainly agree it would not be possible to satisfy > > > > > everyone, but > > > > > >> seeing as the intrinsic toString() is all but useless (and > > > > > people do > > > > > >> generally expect that to be the case with many classes), > > > > > why not give > > > > > >> an implementation that is of at least some use to some > > > people? > > > > > >> Surely it would be better than what you get now? > > > Obviously it's > > > > > >> something many people will override, and that's of course > > > > > the whole > > > > > >> point of inheritance. But providing even a slightly > > > more useful > > > > > >> default implementation (and maybe telling people it's a > > > > > basic default > > > > > >> implementation so as to try and keep the flood of bugzilla > > > > > requests > > > > > >> to a > > > > > >> minimum) seems to me like a good idea. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> I can't address your point about dynabeans because I > > > haven't used > > > > > >> them enough to be able to intelligently comment (which > > > is to say > > > > > >> I haven't used them at all! :) )... I wouodn't imagine > > > some basic > > > > > >> implementation would be too tough for them as well. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> In any case, I will look at the toString builders you > > > mentioned... > > > > > >> I've come to really like using the commons packages > > > and I try to > > > > > >> whenever I can. This would be a good case I think, if it > > > > > doesn't get > > > > > >> added as I proposed. I already have an ActionHelpers > > > class with > > > > > >> a bunch of similarly-themed static methods for use > > > from Actions, > > > > > >> so maybe it's time to do so for forms as well. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> -- > > > > > >> Frank W. Zammetti > > > > > >> Founder and Chief Software Architect Omnytex Technologies > > > > > >> http://www.omnytex.com > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Niall Pemberton wrote: > > > > > >> > Frank, > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > For me it wouldn't be any use unless it also handled > > > > > >> DynaBeans. Even > > > > > >> > then I'd end up overriding it because I have some > > > > > formatting utils > > > > > >> > which do dates, arrays and collections. Seems to me if > > > > > we put it in > > > > > >> > then we would end up with a monster trying to satisy > > > > > >> everyones needs > > > > > >> > and forever dealing with bugzilla requests for > > > > > enhacements (someone > > > > > >> > would want an i18n version!) - all just for debugging. > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > The easiest thing is to just put all that code into a > > > > > >> utility method - > > > > > >> > that way its only a one liner in the toString() - even > > > > > >> better if you > > > > > >> > have your own "base" ActionForm that all you > others derive > > > > > >> from, then > > > > > >> > its only in one place. > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > Also, there are a set of "toString" builders in commons > > > > > >> lang which you > > > > > >> > might like to use - including a reflection one > like yours: > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > http://jakarta.apache.org/commons/lang/api/org/apache/commons/lang/b > > > > > u > > > > > >> i > > > > > >> > lder/package-summary.html > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > http://jakarta.apache.org/commons/lang/api/org/apache/commons/lang/b > > > > > u > > > > > >> i > > > > > >> > lder/ReflectionToStringBuilder.html > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > Niall > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > > >> > From: "Frank W. Zammetti" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > >> > To: "Struts Developer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > >> > Sent: Thursday, October 07, 2004 4:29 AM > > > > > >> > Subject: Re: Proposed Action base class change > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >>Obviously I made a typo in the subject... this > > > applies to the > > > > > >> >>ActionForm base class. > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >>Did anyone have any comment on this? I've noticed a lack > > > > > >> of activity > > > > > >> >>on the list lately... > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >>>Hello all... > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> >>>I find myself all the time overloading toString() of my > > > > > >> ActionForms > > > > > >> >>>for > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > debugging > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >>>purposes, so I can easily dump the current state of the > > > > > object. I > > > > > >> >>>had > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > been doing > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >>>this for each ActionForm class, specifically for it, but > > > > > >> it ocurrs to > > > > > >> >>>me > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > that a > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >>>general-purpose reflection-based approach would > be better. > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> >>>I'd like to propose adding this functionality to the > > > > > >> ActionForm base > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > class. Here's > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >>>the code I propose adding: > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> >>>import java.lang.reflect.Field; public static final > > > > > >> >>>AVERAGE_FIELD_SIZE = 25; public String > > > > > >> toString() > > > > > >> >>>{ > > > > > >> >>> String str = ""; > > > > > >> >>> StringBuffer sb = null; > > > > > >> >>> try { > > > > > >> >>> Field[] fields = > this.getClass().getDeclaredFields(); > > > > > >> >>> sb = new StringBuffer(fields.length * > > > AVERAGE_FIELD_SIZE); > > > > > >> >>> for (int i = 0; i < fields.length; i++) { > > > > > >> >>> if (sb.length() > 0) { sb.append(", "); } > > > > > >> >>> sb.append(fields[i].getName() + "=" + > > > > > fields[i].get(this)); > > > > > >> >>> } > > > > > >> >>> str = sb.toString().trim(); > > > > > >> >>> } catch (Exception e) { > > > > > >> >>> str = "Exception in ActionForm.toString() : " + e; > > > > > >> >>> } > > > > > >> >>> return str; > > > > > >> >>>} > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> >>>The value of AVERAGE_FIELD_SIZE is a matter of debate, > > > > > and it's of > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > course impossible > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >>>to come up with a real value, so something reasonable is > > > > > >> the answer. > > > > > >> >>>25 > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > struck me > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >>>as a decent starting point. > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> >>>What does everyone think? I find this > functionality to be > > > > > >> >>>very useful > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > in my work, > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >>>and I suspect others may as well. The code doesn't add > > > > > >> >>>any dependencies > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > outside > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >>>J2SE, and it's certainly simple enough as to not be > > > > > >> particularly risky. > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> >>>Thanks all! > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> >>>Frank W. Zammetti > > > > > >> >>>Founder and Chief Software Architect Omnytex > Technologies > > > > > >> >>>http://www.omnytex.com > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> > >>----------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > >> >>- > > > > > >> --------- > > > > > >> >>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] > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > - > > > > > >> 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] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > - > > > > 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] > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > 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]
