How about adding a specific list implementation rather than using a generic list. Then your list implementation can maintain the relationships instead of the action. (*Chris*)
On Thu, May 8, 2008 at 7:04 AM, Adam Hardy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Adam Hardy on 08/05/08 12:21, wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> when the Params interceptor populates my entity beans, it must be >>>>>> setting the member variables directly without using the setters. >>>>>> >>>>>> Is there a way to tell it to use the setters? There is some logic in >>>>>> the setters which it would be good if it executed. >>>>> >>>>> It gives precedence to the setters. Why would it not be able to see or >>>>> set the property? >>>> >>>> Really? That's good to know - any work-around was looking distinctly >>>> horrific. >>>> >>>> These are JPA pojos, so the setters should be available. >>>> >>>> Maybe it's breaking the javabean spec in some subtle way - I >>>> double-checked the memvar, getter, setter and constructor though and it >>>> looks OK. >>>> >>> I'm not sure. I ran into this same issue recently and cursed at lot at >>> OGNL only to find out it was caused by erasure of the generic type (ie. the >>> class of the setters argument was Object, not what I thought). It's worth >>> debugging this with a breakpoint. The OGNL implementation is quite >>> straight-forward in the way it searches for properties/methods/members >>> matching the right signature. As it loops through all the properties you >>> should see why it missed the one it should have set. >> >> Doing that now - hopefully the answer will point to a simple solution. I >> can already see that Hibernate has got its grubby nose in there. > > Debugging unmasked what the problem was. OGNL was calling getChildren() and > modifying the collection of children, rather than calling > setChildren(newList) at any point - logically. > > I thought I had disabled that by returning a > Collections.unmodifiableList(list) but in this case I had forgotten. > > Unfortunately for me, returning an unmodifiable collection breaks OGNL. > > I need to maintain the consistency of entity relationships, insuring that > the "one" and the "many" sides of a bidirectional relationship are > consistent with one another when the application updates the relationship at > runtime. > > I'll have to find another way rather than trying to control the list. > > Thanks > Adam > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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]
