>>>>> "Craig" == Craig R McClanahan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Craig> On Sat, 4 Jan 2003, James Turner wrote:
>> Date: Sat, 4 Jan 2003 13:26:34 -0500
>> From: James Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Reply-To: Struts Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Subject: Another bright idea,
>> make "indexed" work with JSTL forEach and friends
>>
>> As has been pointed out, about the only remaining reason to use
>> logic:iterate over c:forEach is that you can't use an html:text tag (or
>> friends) with an "indexed" property set, because it only looks for
>> logic:iterate on the page stack.
>>
>> Now, it would be very simple (having peered at the source) to have the
>> html tags also look for JSTL iterators. However, to make this work,
>> we'd need to add a dependency on jakarta-taglibs so that the class would
>> be available.
>>
>> I don't think that this would break anything in terms of JSP version
>> support, since it wouldn't require evaluation of ELs, just looking up
>> the stack to see if we find a JSTL interator hanging around.
Craig> Unless you can do this all with reflection (instead of instanceof and
Craig> direct method calls), you'll create NoClassDefFound errors for people who
Craig> don't have the JSTL library in the stack. Other than that caution, I'm
Craig> +1.
That would be gnarly to try to do this with all string-based reflection (no
"ClassName.class" references or "instanceof" usage). Writing a version of
"findAncestorWithClass" that takes a string instead of a Class is the first
step. You'd also have to deal with allowing subclasses of the tag types.
That's probably the ugliest part.
At this point, I really don't see the urgency.
--
===================================================================
David M. Karr ; Java/J2EE/XML/Unix/C++
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ; SCJP; SCWCD
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
