Hi,

I'm under the impression that ognl silently ignores exceptions. 


On 7/29/05, Jeremy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> OK. So I'm a little tired today. 30seconds later, I realize that "fooBlock"
> isn't really a component of Foo because it wasn't declared in Foo.jwc or
> Foo.html.
> 
> However... I think I have somewhat legitimate beef here because... I get no
> exceptions when I try to bind Foo.submittedBlock to the non-existent
> sub-component [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> I just tested this with a reference to a non-existent asset and got no
> exceptions either. Seems like ognl or some layer above it is swallowing
> exceptions thrown when accessing any Map property of a component or page
> with an invalid key.!?!
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jeremy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 5:17 PM
> To: 'Tapestry users'
> Subject: Tapestry 4.0: cannot bind parameters to sub-components
> 
> I have declared a component @Foo:
> 
> 
> 
> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
> 
> <!DOCTYPE component-specification
> 
>       PUBLIC "-//Apache Software Foundation//Tapestry Specification 4.0//EN"
> 
>       "http://jakarta.apache.org/tapestry/dtd/Tapestry_4_0.dtd";>
> 
> 
> 
> <component-specification>
> 
>       <property name="submittedBlock" initial-value="components.fooBlock"/>
> 
> </component-specification>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Foo's template looks like this:
> 
> Hi, this is Foo!
> 
> This is Foo's Block: <span jwcid="@RenderBlock" block="ognl:
> submittedBlock"/>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have another component @Bar that invokes foo this way:
> 
> <span jwcid="@Foo" >
> 
>             <span jwcid="[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 
>                         Hi mom!
> 
>             </span>
> 
> </span>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When I load a page with @Bar, i expect to see the content of @Foo and foo's
> block. But I don't see anything. I assume that this is because the component
> fooBlock doesn't really exist at the time that the default-values for
> parameters are set. But this seems like a big problem. Can anyone replicate
> / invalidate this?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 


-- 
Communism is man's exploitation of man. Capitalism is just the opposite.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to