tapestry-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From bugzi...@apache.org
Subject DO NOT REPLY [Bug 22838] - Add client-size validation to NumericField and ValidatingTextField components
Date Tue, 02 Sep 2003 20:18:22 GMT
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG 
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
<http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22838>.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND 
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22838

Add client-size validation to NumericField and ValidatingTextField components





------- Additional Comments From rlewisshell@mac.com  2003-09-02 20:18 -------
For all of ValidField's well defined separation of concern and pureness, if 
you want to gather a simple string, date or number, it is just harder to use.  
Try comparing the lines of code required and you'll see, especially if you 
make use of template component definitions.  The two places ValidField has an 
advantage IMO are when you need a custom validator (eg. email address, or 
credit card), or when you need to share a single validator.  Our large 
Tapestry app rarely needs either, so we stick with the simpler to use 
components.  Perhaps a better question is why would you use ValidField for 
simple numberic/date, or string data?  :-)  For 3.1 I want to raise this issue 
with a view to promoting these components back into Tapestry framework proper, 
for the very reason that they are easier to use ~90% of the time.

Mime
View raw message