Ok. Scratch that, I was correct the first time.
Here's my test.jsp:
<%
java.util.Map emptyMap = new java.util.HashMap();
pageContext.setAttribute("emptyMap", emptyMap);
%>
<logic:empty name="emptyMap">The map is empty.</logic:empty><br>
<logic:notEmpty name="emptyMap">The map is not
empty.</logic:notEmpty><br>
Sorry for the confusing posts, I stopped drinking coffee a few weeks
ago, and things just haven't been the same.
--
James Mitchell
Software Engineer/Struts Evangelist
http://www.open-tools.org/
"The man who does not read good books has no advantage over the man who
cannot read them."
- Mark Twain (1835-1910)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: James Mitchell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 19, 2003 11:02 AM
> To: 'Struts Users Mailing List'
> Subject: RE: logic:empty and logicnotEmpty with a Collection (again)
>
>
> Oops, hold that thought. I didn't read my results correctly.
>
> You're right, my test.jsp showed both (which is wrong).
> I'll take a closer look at this.
>
>
> --
> James Mitchell
> Software Engineer/Struts Evangelist
> http://www.open-tools.org/
>
> "The man who does not read good books has no advantage over
> the man who
> cannot read them."
> - Mark Twain (1835-1910)
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: James Mitchell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf
> > Of James Mitchell
> > Sent: Wednesday, February 19, 2003 10:56 AM
> > To: 'Struts Users Mailing List'
> > Subject: RE: logic:empty and logicnotEmpty with a Collection (again)
> >
> >
> > That doesn't seem right. What version are you using?
> >
> > I recently finished cactus tests on the logic tags, and I
> test exactly
> > what you've described without failures.
> >
> >
> > In fact, I just tried this in a test.jsp:
> > <%@ page contentType="text/html;charset=UTF-8" language="java" %>
> > <%@ taglib uri="/WEB-INF/struts-logic.tld" prefix="logic" %>
> > <%
> > java.util.Map emptyMap = new java.util.HashMap();
> > pageContext.setAttribute("emptyMap", emptyMap);
> > %>
> > <logic:empty name="emptyMap">emptyMap empty</logic:empty><br>
> > <logic:notEmpty name="emptyMap">emptyMap not
> > empty</logic:notEmpty><br>
> >
> >
> >
> > ....works fine.
> >
> > You probably forgot to add the taglib declaration:
> > <%@ taglib uri="/WEB-INF/struts-logic.tld" prefix="logic" %>
> >
> > If you did not do this, then you will see exactly what you've
> > described.
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > James Mitchell
> > Software Engineer/Struts Evangelist
> > http://www.open-tools.org/
> >
> > "The man who does not read good books has no advantage over
> > the man who
> > cannot read them."
> > - Mark Twain (1835-1910)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, February 19, 2003 3:11 AM
> > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Subject: logic:empty and logicnotEmpty with a Collection (again)
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I found some behaviour of the logic:notEmpty tag which I think is
> > > inconsistent.
> > >
> > > Reading the documentation, I think it should call a
> > > collection's isEmpty()
> > > method. It works as expected with a bean of type List, but it
> > > doesn't work
> > > with a Map.
> > >
> > > Testcase:
> > >
> > > If emptyList was built with
> > >
> > > List emptyList = new ArrayList();
> > >
> > > the following fragment correctly states only "emptyList empty":
> > >
> > > <logic:empty name="emptyList">emptyList empty</logic:empty><br>
> > > <logic:notEmpty name="emptyList">emptyList not
> > > empty</logic:notEmpty><br>
> > >
> > > But if I change from emtpyList to
> > >
> > > Map emptyMap = new HashMap();
> > >
> > > and test it with
> > >
> > > <logic:empty name="emptyMap">emptyMap empty</logic:empty><br>
> > > <logic:notEmpty name="emptyMap">emptyMap not
> > > empty</logic:notEmpty><br>
> > >
> > > I get
> > >
> > > emptyMap not empty
> > > nonemptyMap not empty
> > >
> > > instead of just "emptyMap empty". Both (mutually exclusive)
> > > statements seem
> > > to evaluate to true.
> > >
> > > So, is this a misunderstanding from my side or a bug in the
> > > implementation?
> > >
> > > TIA
> > >
> > > Steffen
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > For additional commands, e-mail:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
