DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT <http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14800>. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14800 Fix initialization bug and add size parameter to form-property [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RESOLVED |REOPENED Resolution|FIXED | ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2002-12-24 02:50 ------- Eep. Your patch of 20021224 is *almost* what I expected (initialization not withstanding) As I envisioned it, size= would both create the array and populate it with the results of calling "newInstance" on the base class. While this might not be important for something like String, which will have the class instances overwritten when it is populated from a form, it is crucial for a class with properties being used in an iteration inside a form. As you coded things (leaving out this piece): for (int j = 0; j < this.getSize(); j++) { Array.set(a, j, componentType.newInstance()); } there's no way to initialize the array elements to "blank" instances without writing a reset method, which means you can't use a DynaForm, which negates the value of size= As you (Craig) may recall from our conversation, I thought we had agreed that the contract for an class that was used in size= would be that it's default constructor would be responsible for any initializations needed for use. James -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
