I guess it would be more like a Session.exists() :)+1 for that. it's backportable.FrankOn 8/26/06, Jaime De La Jara
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:I think Igor proposal, session.exists(), is correct and it could be added without
any impact.Jaime.i think thats better then an npe, didnt even know we were
remind me again why we let smartasses in?-IgorOn 8/25/06, Frank Bille [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I guess it would be more like a Session.exists() :)+1 for that. it's backportable.
FrankOn 8/26/06, Jaime De La Jara
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think Igor proposal, session.exists(), is correct and it
Eelco wants company.On 8/26/06, Igor Vaynberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
remind me again why we let smartasses in?-IgorOn 8/25/06,
Frank Bille [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I guess it would be more like a Session.exists() :)+1 for that. it's backportable.
FrankOn 8/26/06, Jaime De La Jara
[EMAIL
yes it is backportable (that method)but we can't kill the exception throwing in 1.2 that is not backportable.johanOn 8/26/06, Frank Bille
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I guess it would be more like a Session.exists() :)+1 for that. it's backportable.Frank
On 8/26/06, Jaime De La Jara
[EMAIL
If I were the teacher, my student passed me by far ;)
Eelco
On 8/26/06, Johan Compagner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Eelco wants company.
On 8/26/06, Igor Vaynberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
remind me again why we let smartasses in?
-Igor
On 8/25/06, Frank Bille [EMAIL
you are so humble, anyways just checked in exists() for app and session, seems requestcycle doesnt follow the same rules and will just return null - not something we should tweak in 1.x stream because of silent failure.
-IgorOn 8/26/06, Eelco Hillenius [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If I were the
The not-throwing exception change could go into 1.3 IMO.
Martijn
On 8/26/06, Igor Vaynberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
you are so humble, anyways just checked in exists() for app and session,
seems requestcycle doesnt follow the same rules and will just return null -
not something we should
I'm in favor of Session.get() returning null in 2.0, if not earlier.
You could add exists() in 1.3 and deprecate it in 2.0.
Gili
Frank Bille wrote:
I guess it would be more like a Session.exists() :)
+1 for that. it's backportable.
Frank
On 8/26/06, *Jaime De La Jara*
I think Igor proposal, session.exists(), is correct and it could be added without any impact.Jaime.i think thats better then an npe, didnt even know we were doing that. so either this or add a session.exists() so you can test for it. -IgorOn 8/25/06, Eelco Hillenius [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I
