On Tue, Dec 20, 2005 at 03:53:24PM -0500, Stephen Bash wrote: > Now if I can think out loud for a minute... The NPE is most definitely > a bug, but I'm not sure if there is a resolution to the underlying > problem here (that the object type being held in the collection is not > defined)... Castor can't really introspect a collection to figure out > the internal object type, but I guess the dependency on object type in > the hash code could be removed. Maybe working on the test case will > bring a few more things to light.
I have never been sure how Castor expects to handle collections with multiple types inside them, but that might be beside this particular issue. I submit that Castor ought to a) require a type attribute in a field definition (or in some kinds of field definitions) and throw a useful error when it is not there, or b) have some set way of attempting to handle the lack of a type attribute, and throw a useful error when that process fails. Jessica ------------------------------------------------- If you wish to unsubscribe from this list, please send an empty message to the following address: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -------------------------------------------------
