Niall I personally agree with you. Its not something I would necessarily use. It adds complexity to the message resource in my opinion since now one must check for circularity, and what does one do if there is circularity?
Secondly I'm not entirely sure the patch really belongs in struts since in 1.3 it looks like we are moving to commons-resources (at least I saw a patch in there to do that although it does not yet seem to be applied to the trunk of 1.3) and in that case the patch probably should go to common resources. I totally understand the chicken egg thing :) I wouldn't bother the user list if I didn't have code to do it already. Heh. I already have the patch or at least can create the svn diff within seconds. Just wondered if it was a one time person saying it would be nice or if there really was interest before even bothering with creating a bug/patch combination. -----Original Message----- From: Niall Pemberton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2005 10:44 AM To: Struts Users Mailing List Subject: Re: MessageResources Its not something I would want and it sounds like its over-complicating the situation. You may want to see if there is any interest from any of the other committers before going to the trouble of coding something. It can be frustrating to bother to submit patches and then have them ignored - either ping the dev list or create a bugzilla enhancement ticket. Having said that, if you don't code up a patch you're just as likely to have someone saying "code talks" - its a bit chicken and egg!!! Niall ----- Original Message ----- From: "Fogleson, Allen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2005 4:18 PM I know last week we had some discussions about MessageResources (mostly about pulling from a DB). I did a little digging and extending and came up with a quick hit that pulled the resources from a db. At the same time I rememebered an earlier discussion about having submessages in messages. That is something like: User.name=Name User.firstName=First ${Name} Calling user.firstName would of course render "First Name". I did a quick addition to the DB code to allow such things (but did not check circularity.. the form where a child message includes a parent (or itself). Long story short is there any interest in this? I can have a quick patch to the core source in bugzilla relatively quickly. Although in testing I think that $( instead of ${ would be better since if ${msg} is not found then the argument processor fails on the argument ${msg} because it is not a number. But that's a small implementation detail. I personally probably wouldn't use the facility much. I think it becomes quickly confusing, but others may see a use for it. (My mileage has certainly varied) --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
