> > Is it that turbine 2.2 users avoid using keys, and fill in > those values > > some other ways?
I use turbine 2.2 without using the de-coupled torque/fulcrum. The coupled versions of both fulcrum and torque are fully functional within turbine 2.2 and that is what I use. AFAIK there are still outstanding issues regarding the compatibility of some decoupled fulcrum services and the core of turbine, including: De-coupled Security Service not compatible with RunData and I think I read there is an issue with file uploads but I'm not sure. hth, Scott > -----Original Message----- > From: Age Mooy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, June 03, 2002 10:03 AM > To: Turbine Users List > Subject: RE: Using NumberKeys: Conflict between built-in and decoupled > Torque in Turbine 2.2b1 > > > I have no solution to this problem but my own workaround is > that instead of: > > data.getParameters().setProperties(entry); > > I do: > > Entry entry = new Entry(); > > entry.setX(new NumberKey(data.getParameters().getInt("x", -1))); > entry.setY(data.getParameters().getString("y", "none")); > etc. > > It's a bit more manual work but this way you totally control > what goes into > your Entry instance. > > Age > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Marc-Antoine Parent [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Monday, June 03, 2002 15:14 > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Using NumberKeys: Conflict between built-in and decoupled > > Torque in Turbine 2.2b1 > > > > > > Good day! > > I am making a few basic experiments with Turbine, and I have tables > > connected with INTEGER foreign keys, which come up in my om > objects as > > org.apache.torque.om.NumberKeys fields. Fine. > > When I try to create objects from a form in an ActionEvent, doing > > data.getParameters().setProperties(entry); > > it invokes a org.apache.turbine.util.parser.BaseValueParser > (possibly > > actually a DefaultParameterParser) which only knows about > > org.apache.turbine.om.NumberKey... and hences throws an > exception at the > > end of the following method: > > private void setProperty(Object bean, > > PropertyDescriptor prop) > > > > Now, I read a bit on the list, and people say that there > are problems > > with the built-in and decoupled torque versions, but it > does seem that > > people generally get past the hurdle of creating an object > from a form! > > I cannot use turbine 2.1 as it chokes on tables without a > primary key; > > and I tried turbine 3, but I got lost in the documentation (or > > scantiness thereof at this stage.) > > Is it that turbine 2.2 users avoid using keys, and fill in > those values > > some other ways? > > Is there an alternative to the BaseValueParser? I also had > a look at > > intake, and it seems to also use the > org.apache.turbine.om.NumberKey > > (built-in.) > > Anyway... ideas appreciated at this point. > > Thank you, > > Marc-Antoine Parent > > > > > > -- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > For additional commands, e-mail: > > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
