I guess, if this was a real issue then more users would have reported it.
However, as a TextField is such an innocent component then any confusing
behaviour should be addressed. Maintaining a common behaviour of
setConvertEmptyInputStringToNull would do that and your proposed solution
looks good.
One thing which was confusing from the javadocs level is the implication
that the setting of a type is defaulted; i.e.
public TextField( String id, Class type ) {
super( id );
setType( type );
...
}
public TextField( String id ) {
super( id );
Class type = workOutTypeFromModelIfPossible( );
if( type == null ) {
type = String.class;
}
setType( type );
...
}
In other words, there is always a type set unless the model is one which
does not allow for it to be derived in which case String is assumed as in
the FormComponent javadocs for setType.
Eric.
On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 1:37 PM, Johan Compagner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Ok i guess if if quickly look at the code.
> If you dont do your own converter then it defaults i guess to the
> DefaultConverter
> that does this:
>
> public Object convertToObject(String value, Locale locale)
> {
> if (value == null)
> {
> return null;
> }
> if ("".equals(value))
> {
> if (((Class)type.get()) == String.class)
> {
> return "";
> }
> return null;
> }
>
> So if it is a String class and the input is "" it does return ""
>
> we could change this:
>
> final IConverter converter = getConverter(getType());
> try
> {
> convertedInput = converter.convertToObject(getInput(),
> getLocale());
> }
>
> in FormComponent..
> If it is of Type String then after the conversion we still check for the
> convert empty to null and do that..
>
> Because now that boolean is of no use if you are setting the Type
>
> johan
>
> johan
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 2:34 PM, Johan Compagner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> > if you are setting the type The converter is called and not
> > convertValue()
> > i am still not really happy with this but for 1.3/1.4 this is the way it
> > works
> >
> > And i guess the String converter that does String to String doesnt óok
> at
> > that convert empty input to null value at all
> >
> > Do you have your own?
> >
> > johan
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 1:38 PM, Eric Rotick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> > > I do have the type set and I've been reading WICKET-606 and I'm using
> > > 1.3.2and there is no converter and convertInput is not called.
> > >
> > > I've now written some code to show that there is a difference.
> > >
> > > form.add( new TextField( "text1", new PropertyModel( this, "text1" ) )
> > > );
> > > form.add( new TextField( "text2", new PropertyModel( this, "text2" )
> > > ).setConvertEmptyInputStringToNull( true ) );
> > > form.add( new TextField( "text3", new PropertyModel( this, "text3" )
> > > ).setConvertEmptyInputStringToNull( false ) );
> > > form.add( new TextField( "text4", new PropertyModel( this, "text4" ),
> > > String.class ) );
> > > form.add( new TextField( "text5", new PropertyModel( this, "text5" ),
> > > String.class ).setConvertEmptyInputStringToNull( true ) );
> > > form.add( new TextField( "text6", new PropertyModel( this, "text6" ),
> > > String.class ).setConvertEmptyInputStringToNull( false ) );
> > >
> > > produces this
> > >
> > > Setting text1 to [null]
> > > Setting text2 to [null]
> > > Setting text3 to []
> > > Setting text4 to []
> > > Setting text5 to []
> > > Setting text6 to []
> > >
> > > So,
> > >
> > > - text1 and text2 are the same because
> > > setConvertEmptyInputStringToNull is true by default
> > > - text3 does what would be expected
> > > - text4 I'm not sure about
> > > - text5 and text6 are anomalous as either one or the other should
> > > produce a null
> > >
> > > I guess the main problem is that I'm not sure what is supposed to
> > > happen. I
> > > though that having set the type to String meant that the normal string
> > > processing took place and setConvertEmptyInputStringToNull did the
> job.
> > >
> > > As it is, I've learned more about how things work and I can overcome
> my
> > > problem. However, if anyone wants me to continue with this I would be
> > > happy
> > > to do so.
> > >
> > > Eric.
> > >
> > > On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 8:58 PM, Johan Compagner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Are you sure you dont have the type set?
> > > > Is a converter used or is convertInput called?
> > > >
> > > > On 3/28/08, Eric Rotick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > Hmm, it's not working for me.
> > > > >
> > > > > There's one other thing I spotted. The docs say that a TextField
> > > > defaults to
> > > > > String.class even if it cannot work out the class from the model.
> My
> > > > model
> > > > > is not one that allows for reflection to determine the class and
> > > > initially
> > > > > all input to the TextField was being set as null even when there
> was
> > > > some.
> > > > > As soon as I added the parameter to set the class to String it
> > > started
> > > > > saving strings correctly.
> > > > >
> > > > > I will have a look at the code to see if there's anything obvious.
> > > > >
> > > > > Eric.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 4:37 PM, Igor Vaynberg <
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > TexField.setConvertEmptyInputStringToNull( true ) worked fine
> for
> > > me
> > > > > > in a quickstart...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -igor
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 8:25 AM, Eric Rotick <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > I've just been reading the section on Forms and validation in
> > > Wicket
> > > > in
> > > > > > > Action and have tried
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > AbstractValidator av = new AbstractValidator( ) {
> > > > > > > protected void onValidate( IValidatable validatable )
> {
> > > > > > > // No nothing
> > > > > > > }
> > > > > > > public boolean validateOnNullValue( ) {
> > > > > > > return true;
> > > > > > > }
> > > > > > > };
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > adding one of these to the TextField but still an empty
> string
> > > gets
> > > > > > > returned.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > All I want to do is get a null string rather than an empty
> > > string
> > > > from
> > > > > > a
> > > > > > > TextField. Has nobody had this use case?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 5:02 PM, Eric Rotick <
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I've just realised that the database is getting filled with
> > > > columns
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > empty strings which then don't cause the 'not null' test to
> > > trip.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The culprit is the TextField returning an empty string
> rather
> > > > than a
> > > > > > null.
> > > > > > > > I can see there are some special considerations for
> returning
> > > a
> > > > null
> > > > > > and I
> > > > > > > > want to understand how they will effect me. However, I've
> > > tried
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > TexField.setConvertEmptyInputStringToNull( true )
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > with no effect and using
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > new TextField( id ) {
> > > > > > > > public boolean isInputNullable() {
> > > > > > > > regturn true;
> > > > > > > > }
> > > > > > > > };
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > also with no effect.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I'm assuming I'm not the first person to see this effect
> and
> > > I
> > > > guess
> > > > > > it's
> > > > > > > > lack of understanding rather than some implicit behaviour
> but
> > > I
> > > > can't
> > > > > > find
> > > > > > > > anything guiding on the subject.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > In this case, the string has no special formatting, it just
> > > needs
> > > > to
> > > > > > be
> > > > > > > > stored verbatim in the database but the application logic
> in
> > > the
> > > > > > backend
> > > > > > > > uses an empty string in a different way than a null string
> > > and,
> > > > yes,
> > > > > > maybe
> > > > > > > > the database should also have a column check but it doesn't
> > > at
> > > > > > present.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Any pointers?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > 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]
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
