On Fri, 31 Jan 2003, Wendy Smoak wrote:
> Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2003 12:56:54 -0700 > From: Wendy Smoak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: Struts Users Mailing List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: 'Struts Users Mailing List' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: RE: Question about struts-example struts-config.xml > > > Actually, there *is* a case when form will be passed as a null -- if > > someone were to modify the struts-config.xml entry for this action, and > > accidentally (or on purpose) remove the "name" or "attribute" attribute. > > Then, the controller servlet would assume that no form bean needs to be > > created, so it won't do so. > > Ahhh... didn't realize that. Basically, I posted my code, which was adapted > from the example, and somebody asked why on earth I was doing that. I > pointed at the example, and was told that it would NEVER happen. So I > believed them, and took it out. > > As for working on the example... would any changes have a chance of getting > committed before 1.1 final, or should I just wait until that's finished? > And what does the diff look like for *removing* a class-- as I understand > this, the LogonForm.java shouldn't even be in there now that > struts-config.xml is set up to automatically generate the form bean. My > limited test shows that the example works fine without it. > Best thing to do is submit the change now. I've already been committing little changes as a result of comments on the user list the last few days (i.e. in tonight's nightly build you won't find LogonForm.java any more, or the comment about tools that you found confusing). Changes to improve the clarity of the examples are much more likely to get in, because there's no risk of destabilizing the framework code itself. Craig > -- > Wendy Smoak > Applications Systems Analyst, Sr. > Arizona State University PA Information Resources Management > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
