Hi James! I've done it now that way - there seems no other solution to this.
thx lukas Am Samstag, 1. Juli 2006 15:48 schrieb James Carman: > You can use a "value object" and bind your form fields to that. Then, when > you submit your form, you can create your "domain object" from your value > object using the constructor. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Lukas Ruetz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Saturday, July 01, 2006 8:26 AM > To: users@tapestry.apache.org > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: component-binding/property side-effect (T4) > > Hi Henrik! > > Yes, I'm using sessions (comes from the authentication). > But again - I'm doing nothing special - I just want a component > to set attributes of a domain-object with values from a form. The > object is provided by a parameter. > > Normally the attributes can be bound to the form-fields. > But as I sayed my domain-object is immutable and the values > can only be provided in the constructor, so the typical mapping > is no solution - the domain-object has no setter-methods. > I just wanted to know if there is a simple solution to this? > > For better understanding here some code: > > --- page --- > class abstract MyPage extends BasePage { > public abstract DomainObj getDomainObj(); > public abstract void setDomainObj(DomainObj obj); > > public void formSubmit() { > DomainObj = getDomainObj(); > // .. work with it > } > ] > > <DEFANGED_form jwcid="@Form"> > <span jwcid="@MyComponent" domainObj="ognl:domainObj" /> > </form> > > --- component --- > class abstract MyComponent extends BaseComponent { > private String _v1, _v2; > > @Parameter(required=true) > public abstract DomainObj getDomainObj(); > public abstract void setDomainObj(DomainObj obj); > > public String getValue1() { return v1; } > public String getValue2() { return v2; } > public void setValue1( String v1 ) { _value1 = v1; } > public void setValue2( String v2 ) { > _value1 = v2; > // *** this here seems to be the problem > setDomainObj( new DomainObj(_1v,_v2) ); > } > } > > <span jwcid="@TextField" value="ognl:value1" /> > <span jwcid="@TextField" value="ognl:value2" /> > --- > > This is really ugly, so is there a correct way to do that? Or is > it much more simple to wrap my immutable class in one that has > setters for attributes? > > thx > lukas > > Am Samstag, 1. Juli 2006 12:45 schrieb hv @ Fashion Content: > > Hmm, could you describe the situation a bit more. Are you using sessions > > or > > > not ? > > It sounds like you are trying to break the encapsulation of the > > component. Are you looking to have an object attached to the page which > > is accessed > > by > > > the component > > and presented as a component getter ? > > I can't think of why you would want to do that. > > > > But if you really want to do it, provide the page property as a parameter > > of the component. > > > > Henrik > > > > "Lukas Ruetz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> skrev i en meddelelse > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > Hello! > > > > > > My current side-effect is, that I get the correct (posted) > > > binding-value in my page-code only _once_! If I read the abstract > > > getter a second time (still in the same request-cycle) I get an old > > > value from a previous page-submit (a different page)! > > > > > > I want to have something like this: > > > page -> binding (1 object) -> myComponent -> some properties -> > > > form-fields > > > > > > I have already heard of side-effects if the property getters/setters > > > are not managed by tapestry (abstract methods). Currently I have > > > implemented the property-setters (in the component) my own to be able > > > to create the resulting object out of the different (posted) > > form-fields. > > > > I can't use the usual mapping from domain-object-attributes to > > > form-fields because the used class is immutable and the values can > > > only be provided in the constructor. > > > > > > So my question is - Where to put the code that creates my resulting > > > (immutable) object if I have to use abstract property-setters? > > > Or is the only solution to use the typical approach and a class that > > > just transports the values? > > > > > > thanks > > > lukas --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
