The ">" characters are normally used to differentiate what I said from what you
said. Prefacing *every* line with ">" somewhat defeats the purpose and breaks
with tradition.
--- On Fri, 11/7/08, SanJ.SANJAY wrote:
> I changed to put that in direct request also and did'nt work:
> request.setAttribute("xxxCollection", xxxCollection);
You didn't answer my question; if you <logic:iterate...> over the collection
without the <bean:write...> is there an iteration taking place? You can find
out by putting a simple string inside the iterate tag and see if it prints at
all. IIRC the iterate tag should search the appropriate scopes for the named
collection.
> Ok, I have this question, do we really need to have the
> property in collection?
If you want the syntax you're using to work, yes. Your original code looked
like this:
<bean:write name="iprecord" property="xxxCollection" />
IIRC that (more or less) means iprecord.getXxxCollection(), no? If you don't
want to access a property of the iprecord element then you should leave off the
"property" attribute:
<bean:write name="iprecord" />
This will just emit each item being iterated over. I have no real way of
knowing what your intention is, however, without more information.
See [1], or the version appropriate for whatever Struts 1 version you're using.
> Can't I use collection with direct elements in it by setting that to request?
Sure, but that's not what you did.
> And if suppose I use a property "filename" and add that to collection
> "xxxCollection" and set the "xxxCollection" to request, all I need to do
> is have this properties POJOS in form right?
IIRC none of your sample code accessed the form, it just used scoped variables.
It might be easier to help if the missing bits of your example were posted.
Dave
[1] Struts 1.2.x <bean:write...> docs
http://struts.apache.org/1.2.x/userGuide/struts-bean.html#write
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
