Paul Benedict wrote the following on 11/7/2005 7:38 PM:
You are much better off using JSTL so you can write something like:
<html:textarea property="${form.object[i].subobject[j].property"/>
Actually the above is not what you probably want at all. The above is
not going to write out the name of the property correctly. You probably
mean something like...
<html:textarea
property="someObject[${aProp.someIndex}].subobject[${bProp.someIndex}].someField"/>
Once you go JSTL, you never go back :-) Which makes the <nested> object tags
obsolete.
I would disagree there. I love JSTL, but the nested tag is nice and
makes things much cleaner.
Compare a JSTL version vs Nested tag version:
<%-- NESTED TAG WAY OF DOING IT: --%>
<nested:iterate property="departments">
Department: <nested:text property="deptName"/><br/><br/>
<div style="margin-left:10px">
<nested:iterate property="employees">
Employee: <nested:text property="empName"/>
E-mail: <nested:text property="email"/><br/>
</nested:iterate>
</div>
<br/><br/>
</nested:iterate>
<%-- JSTL WAY OF DOING IT: --%>
<c:forEach items="${companyForm.departments}" var="dept"
varStatus="deptStatus">
Department: <html:text
property="departments[${deptStatus.index}].deptName"
value="${dept.deptName}" /><br/>
<div style="margin-left:10px">
<c:forEach items="${dept.employees}" var="emp"
varStatus="empStatus">
Employee: <html:text
property="departments[${deptStatus.index}].employees[${empStatus.index}].empName"
value="${emp.empName}" />
E-mail: <html:text
property="departments[${deptStatus.index}].employees[${empStatus.index}].email"
value="${emp.email}" />
<br/>
</c:forEach>
</div>
<br/><br/>
</c:forEach>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
