on 5/3/2000 9:20 AM, Sean Legassick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Fair enough - I was thinking of actions like 'admin.ChooseOrFindUser'.
> The action puts the user list in the temp hash anyway, and if it were in
> a shared WebContext instead a screen class wouldn't be necessary to use
> a WM template to display the user list.
Actually, don't look at that code...it is all being ripped out and re-done.
> But I've no problem with being vetoed on this - I'm just lazy and
> fancied not having to write as many Screens :)
You don't have to have a 1-1 mapping between a Screen and a WM template...as
long as you don't need any Context for that template.
> Dave's question about making the default install have 'WebMacroSitePage' as
> the default page never got resolved... what's happening on that?
-1. While I love WM, we can't be strictly a WM application. If you look in
recent CVS, I have started to add a system that will build the WAR file for
you. It is very WM specific. That stuff should go into there with a
<replace> Ant task. :-)
> I've written a utility function for myself that takes a ParameterParser
> and a bean and uses introspection to set bean properties from request
> parameters automatically (Yes, I really am lazy :). I'd be happy to
> knock this into a patch for ParameterParser itself, but perhaps this
> kind of laziness is frowned upon? At the moment it only supports the
> types I need right now (int, String and Date) but I could add to this
> list...
>
> In case its not obvious, I envisage the function being used in an Action
> that transfers form parameters into a bean. I got the idea from the JSP
> (sorry!) <jsp:setProperty property="*"> tag.
Cool...send me the file as an enclosure and I will review and put it into
CVS...
-jon
--
Scarab -
Java Servlet Based - Open Source
Bug/Issue Tracking System
<http://scarab.tigris.org/>
------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
