oh...that might be an idea.  I'll try that thanks.

I hope it works though, because otherwise this will be a tough nut to crack.  

Dennis, do you consider this to be a bug?  I read through the
archives, and I noticed that someone else had a similar problem,
except with him it was using ints, which weren't being marshalled when
the value was '0'.  One of his workarounds was to change the default
to '-9999'  but that caused some other headaches.  With a boolean,
even that workaround is off limits, since there are only 2 possible
values :(.




On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 16:07:41 -0600, Darin Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Random thought, and I don't know if it applies, but.. if you have
> control over the java code, changing the little-b-booleans to
> big-b-Booleans will both handle your problem and remove the need for any
> test methods..
> 
> On Fri, 2005-03-18 at 15:28, Dennis Sosnoski wrote:
> > This looks like an oversight in the JiBX definitions. If a value is
> > labeled as usage="optional" JiBX makes the default value the same as the
> > initial state of a value of that type, as defined by the Java language
> > (for a boolean this is "false"), and JiBX only marshals an optional
> > value if it differs from the default. The problem is that you'd like to
> > have the marshalling controlled by the test-method and ignore the
> > default. So everything is working as defined, but not as you'd like it to.
> >
> > I'm not sure how to handle this. Changing the code to ignore the default
> > value when a test-method is supplied would work for you, but might break
> > other users' code. I'll try to find a work-around over the weekend,
> > since this relates to some other issues I'd like to get fixed for the
> > 1.0 RC.
> >
> >   - Dennis
> >
> > Beet wrote:
> >
> > >I'm having a problem marshalling some elements, and I can't figure out
> > >the problem.  The elements are defined as optional, and map back to
> > >boolean fields.  I have a test-method that checks to see if the I
> > >should marshal the element, but the problem is that even though the
> > >test-method returns true, the element doesn't get marshalled unless
> > >the actual field value is true as well.  In other words, when the java
> > >field to marshal is set to false, no marshalling!  If it's set to
> > >true, then the element is marshalled ok... I don't understand why this
> > >is.  I've checked and debugged, and I'm positive that my test-method
> > >is right.
> > >
> > >Here's the JiBX binding code:
> > >
> > ><structure name="Questions" field="questions" usage="optional"
> > >test-method="hasQuestions">
> > >     <value name="Q1" get-method="getQ1" set-method="setQ1"
> > >usage="optional" test-method="hasQ1"/>
> > >     <value name="Q2" get-method="getQ2" set-method="setQ2"
> > >usage="optional" test-method="hasQ2"/>
> > >     <value name="Q3" get-method="getQ3" set-method="setQ3"
> > >usage="optional" test-method="hasQ3"/>
> > >     <value name="Q4" get-method="getQ4" set-method="setQ4"
> > >usage="optional" test-method="hasQ4"/>
> > ></structure>
> > >
> > >So when methods hasQ1-hasQ4 all return true, I expect something like
> > ><Questions>
> > >    <Q1>true</Q1>
> > >    <Q2>true</Q2>
> > >    <Q3>false</Q3>
> > >    <Q4>true</Q4>
> > ></Questions>
> > >
> > >Unfortunately, it only does the above if all the fields are true.  If
> > >q3 is false, then it is omitted and the result is:
> > ><Questions>
> > >    <Q1>true</Q1>
> > >    <Q2>true</Q2>
> > >    <Q4>true</Q4>
> > ></Questions>
> > >
> > >Even though the hasQ3 set-method returns true.  Instead of using get
> > >and set methods, I've also tried just using the field name, but same
> > >result.  Please help!
> > >
> > >
> > >-------------------------------------------------------
> > >SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
> > >Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users.
> > >Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now.
> > >http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click
> > >_______________________________________________
> > >jibx-users mailing list
> > >[email protected]
> > >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jibx-users
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------------
> > SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
> > Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users.
> > Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now.
> > http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click
> > _______________________________________________
> > jibx-users mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jibx-users
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
> Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users.
> Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now.
> http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click
> _______________________________________________
> jibx-users mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jibx-users
>


-------------------------------------------------------
SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users.
Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now.
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click
_______________________________________________
jibx-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jibx-users

Reply via email to