If you are using request scope beans than using the getters and setters is quite normal. Not too hackish in my opinion..
sandeep --- Linus Nikander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > First off, thank you for the reply. > > As you point out both solutions that you suggest > have a certain hackishness > over them it would be nice to avoid. As displaying > data from a DB-table, > allowing that data to be edited (en masse, not one > record at a time), must > be a pretty common task, doesn't anyone have a more > elegant solution when > using struts ? > > //Linus > > > "John M. Corro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote > in message > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > I've seen two ways of dealing w/ this problem, > both of which I see as > 'hackish' > > in nature. > > > > Solution A: > > > > In your getters/setters you implement the > following code > > > > public MyCustomBean getMyCustomBean(int index) { > > while(index >= myCustomBeanList.size()) { > > myCustomBeanList.add(new MyCustomBean()); > > } > > return > (MyCustomBean)myCustomBeanList.get(index); > > } > > > > In that way you'll never encounter the common > IndexOutOfBoundsException. > The > > problem here is that you tend to use alot of > hidden fields in your UI to > repopulate > > the data back into the dynamically created beans. > > > > Solution B: > > > > In your reset() method you repopulate your > internal Collection of beans. > The > > problem w/ this approach is that often times you > have a separate Action > that > > prepopulates your ActionForm. This provides for > good separation - the > Action > > is a retriever of a data (nothing more) and the > ActionForm is merely a > container > > for data (nothing more). With this approach your > ActionForm suddenly > starts > > becoming more intelligent than it really should > be. Now it's aware of how > to > > populate itself...not a good thing IMO. > > > > I'd be very interested in hearing other solutions > to this problem as I > find > > both of the above solutions cumbersome and hackish > and would love to stop > implementing > > them. > > > > >I've been struggling with a problem similar to > the one described (and > > >solved) at > > > >http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg50901.html > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! http://sbc.yahoo.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
