struts-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mark Lowe <>
Subject Re: Newbie: java.lang.boolean and DynaActionForm?
Date Wed, 17 Dec 2003 16:11:40 GMT
Hi Ed

I've checked my spellings this time.

On 17 Dec 2003, at 15:49, Ed Dowgiallo wrote:

> Mark,
>     Perhaps I am getting old, but the meaning of your metaphors went  
> over my
> head.  On the other hand, this is an international audience.
>     What is a chocolate fire guard?

A fire guard is like a shield one places in front of a fire to prevent  
any bits of hot ash escaping and setting one's house on fire. These are  
usually made of metal as it is fire proof. A fireguard made of  
chocolate wouldn't be much use, as it would melt and not protect one's  
house from the peril of smoldering ash.

>     Do you believe it is harder or easier to use DynaActionForms  
> instead of
> Strings?

A few months ago it was certainly the case that using strings when  
using dynaaction forms was the only sure way of getting stuff running.  
But robert sounds like he's been using objects in there and sounds good  
to me, I think that beanutils has problems with BigDecimal and perhaps  
other objects but I dont remeber the details. I haven't used dynaforms  
in a while because i dont like the way you have to wait until runtime  
to see whether there's a problem.

>     Is taking the piss a bit a good thing or a bad thing?

Its another why of saying, "taking the mickey" , or "making fun of  
something".. It used to be the case in victorian times in england that  
urine would fetch enough money for a decent meal. As urine was used for  
cosmetic and medical purposes by the affluent classes, urine would be  
exchanged by poorer folks for a financial reward. Thus the phrase was  
born "taking the piss" its also where "spending a penny" came from.

Cheers Mark

> Thank you,
> Ed
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mark Lowe" <>
> To: "Struts Users Mailing List" <>
> Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2003 10:33 AM
> Subject: Re: Newbie: java.lang.boolean and DynaActionForm?
>> No one's suggesting that anyone hangs them selves or that struts isn't
>> good. But the fact that this list sees a high influx of newbies,
>> getting battered with high-brow design concepts which while are very
>> interesting have a certain chocolate fire guard quality to them .
>> Easiest thing is to make all the form properties strings, or like has
>> been suggested, non primitives. It was certainly the case a few months
>> ago that to use dynaaction forms then it was just less bother to use
>> strings.
>> Sure nesting model objects in action forms does take the piss a bit,
>> but its nothing that cant be sorted when clients/non tech bosses have
>> stopped wetting themselves about image swaps..
>> Cheers Mark
>> On 17 Dec 2003, at 15:27, Robert Taylor wrote:
>>> To address the "fundemental" question, it is considered a "best
>>> practice"
>>> to only use String or Boolean objects or collections of String and/or
>>> Boolean objects or collection of
>>> data structures which contain String and/or Boolean objects in your
>>> forms.
>>> This is because it gives you
>>> more control over validation. This doesn't mean that DynaActionForms  
>>> or
>>> any DynaXXXXForm for that matter doesn't support non-string types. It
>>> supports
>>> any Object because essentially the DynaXXXForms internal data
>>> structure is a
>>> Map.
>>> In general the Struts form should be a ValueObject passing immutable
>>> data
>>> from the input
>>> to be processed or passing immutable data to the output to be  
>>> rendered.
>>> The great thing about Struts is that it gives you more than enough
>>> "rope" to
>>> use wisely or hang yourself :)
>>> robert
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Engbers, ir. J.B.O.M. []
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2003 9:24 AM
>>>> To: ''
>>>> Subject: Newbie: java.lang.boolean and DynaActionForm?
>>>> Hi,
>>>> Both 'Struts in Action' and 'Programming Jakarta Struts' state that
>>>> ActionForms and DynaActionForms are nearly equivalent and the
>>>> main advantage
>>>> of using DynaActionForms is that you don't have to declare all the
>>>> getters
>>>> and setters.
>>>> In DynaAction Forms each property can be of a (array of a)
>>>> primitive types.
>>>> Thanks to Pedro Salgado and Martin Gainty (see "Retrieving boolean
>>>> properties from a DynaActionForm" on december 16), I partially
>>>> succeeded in
>>>> solving the first problem which only confronted me with the next
>>>> problem :-(
>>>> And while looking for a solution to that problem, I found a  
>>>> bugreport
>>>> (23355) in which Craig states that
>>>> 'Adding these (getInteger, getBoolean etc, Ben) would encourage a
>>>> behavior
>>>> that Struts discourages -- using
>>>> non-String data types in a form bean.'
>>>> Maybe that this explains why I have only found examples that use
>>>> String-properties (which lead me to my first question: where can I
>>>> find
>>>> examples that use non_string properties?) but it leaves me with the
>>>> more
>>>> fundamental question:
>>>> Why do DynaActionForms offer the possibility to declare non-String
>>>> properties without supporting them?
>>>> Should I avoid using DynaActionForms at all and use the
>>>> DynaValidatorForm?
>>>> Ben Engbers
>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- 
>>>> -
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail:
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>>> For additional commands, e-mail:
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>> For additional commands, e-mail:
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message