There are several companies that would agree ;-) On Thu, 2004-10-07 at 13:29, Paul Speed wrote:
> It was bound to happen... sometimes it would be nice to have an "unsend" > button. :) Just need to work out that whole time/space continuum thing. > -Paul > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > Bah2 ;-) > > > > Saw this message after I had already responded to the previous one.... > > > > Hiran > > > > ----------------------------------------- > > Hiran Chaudhuri > > SAG Systemhaus GmbH > > Elsenheimer Straße 11 > > 80867 München > > Phone +49-89-54 74 21 34 > > Fax +49-89-54 74 21 99 > > > > > > > > > > > >>-----Original Message----- > >>From: Paul Speed [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>Sent: Donnerstag, 7. Oktober 2004 17:41 > >>To: Struts Developers List > >>Subject: Re: Proposed Action base class change > >> > >>Bah! Realized after I hit send that you were talking about logging. > >>Others have already pointed out how to do that one using the > >>System call. > >> > >>So, nevermind. > >>-Paul > >> > >>Paul Speed wrote: > >> > >> > >>>I'd just like to point out that the only valid way to tell if two > >>>objects are the same instance if to use ==. Any other > >> > >>approach will > >> > >>>not work. > >>> > >>>Comparing the toString() method results as you do is only really > >>>comparing the hashcodes... which are not unique by a long shot (I > >>>never assume people know this). Besides, == is even faster. What > >>>cases do you find that you've had to use > >> > >>.toString().equals(...) where > >> > >>>you couldn't just do an == check? > >>> > >>>-Paul > >>> > >>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>>>Hi, Frank. > >>>> > >>>>I do not agree. While in most cases it is desireable to > >> > >>see inside a > >> > >>>>bean (hence I created my public static String > >> > >>toString(Object bean) > >> > >>>>method), there are times when I just have to make sure a > >> > >>bean is not > >> > >>>>just equal but the same instance. > >>>>The java.lang.Object.toString() methods allows me to that quite > >>>>quickly as the memory address is printed. > >>>> > >>>>Unless you have another way to provide that information, > >> > >>I'd rather > >> > >>>>stick with the default toString() plus some utility > >> > >>toString(Object) > >> > >>>>method. The impact for you is not too much. What you code > >> > >>so far is: > >> > >>>> log.debug("mybean="+mybean); > >>>>and you'd have to change that to > >>>> log.debug("mybean="+BeanUtil.toString(mybean)); > >>>>which will allow you to either see the memory address or the > >>>>contents, whatever you prefer. > >>>> > >>>>Hiran > >>>> > >>>>----------------------------------------- > >>>>Hiran Chaudhuri > >>>>SAG Systemhaus GmbH > >>>>Elsenheimer Straße 11 > >>>>80867 München > >>>>Phone +49-89-54 74 21 34 > >>>>Fax +49-89-54 74 21 99 > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>-----Original Message----- > >>>>>From: Frank W. Zammetti [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: > >>>>>Donnerstag, 7. Oktober 2004 13:43 > >>>>>To: Struts Developers List > >>>>>Subject: Re: Proposed Action base class change > >>>>> > >>>>>Hi Niall, > >>>>> > >>>>>I certainly agree it would not be possible to satisfy > >> > >>everyone, but > >> > >>>>>seeing as the intrinsic toString() is all but useless > >> > >>(and people do > >> > >>>>>generally expect that to be the case with many classes), why not > >>>>>give an implementation that is of at least some use to > >> > >>some people? > >> > >>>>>Surely it would be better than what you get now? Obviously it's > >>>>>something many people will override, and that's of course > >> > >>the whole > >> > >>>>>point of inheritance. But providing even a slightly more useful > >>>>>default implementation (and maybe telling people it's a basic > >>>>>default implementation so as to try and keep the flood of > >> > >>bugzilla > >> > >>>>>requests to a > >>>>>minimum) seems to me like a good idea. > >>>>> > >>>>>I can't address your point about dynabeans because I haven't used > >>>>>them enough to be able to intelligently comment (which is > >> > >>to say I > >> > >>>>>haven't used them at all! :) )... I wouodn't imagine some basic > >>>>>implementation would be too tough for them as well. > >>>>> > >>>>>In any case, I will look at the toString builders you > >> > >>mentioned... > >> > >>>>>I've come to really like using the commons packages and I try to > >>>>>whenever I can. This would be a good case I think, if it doesn't > >>>>>get added as I proposed. I already have an ActionHelpers > >> > >>class with > >> > >>>>>a bunch of similarly-themed static methods for use from > >> > >>Actions, so > >> > >>>>>maybe it's time to do so for forms as well. > >>>>> > >>>>>-- > >>>>>Frank W. Zammetti > >>>>>Founder and Chief Software Architect Omnytex Technologies > >>>>>http://www.omnytex.com > >>>>> > >>>>>Niall Pemberton wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>Frank, > >>>>>> > >>>>>>For me it wouldn't be any use unless it also handled > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>DynaBeans. Even > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>then I'd end up overriding it because I have some > >> > >>formatting utils > >> > >>>>>>which do dates, arrays and collections. Seems to me if > >> > >>we put it in > >> > >>>>>>then we would end up with a monster trying to satisy > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>everyones needs > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>and forever dealing with bugzilla requests for > >> > >>enhacements (someone > >> > >>>>>>would want an i18n version!) - all just for debugging. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>The easiest thing is to just put all that code into a > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>utility method - > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>that way its only a one liner in the toString() - even > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>better if you > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>have your own "base" ActionForm that all you others derive > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>from, then > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>its only in one place. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>Also, there are a set of "toString" builders in commons > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>lang which you > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>might like to use - including a reflection one like yours: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>http://jakarta.apache.org/commons/lang/api/org/apache/commons/lang/b > >> > >>>>>ui > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>lder/package-summary.html > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>http://jakarta.apache.org/commons/lang/api/org/apache/commons/lang/b > >> > >>>>>ui > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>lder/ReflectionToStringBuilder.html > >>>>>> > >>>>>>Niall > >>>>>> > >>>>>>----- Original Message ----- > >>>>>>From: "Frank W. Zammetti" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>>>>>To: "Struts Developer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>>>>>Sent: Thursday, October 07, 2004 4:29 AM > >>>>>>Subject: Re: Proposed Action base class change > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>Obviously I made a typo in the subject... this applies to the > >>>>>>>ActionForm base class. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>Did anyone have any comment on this? I've noticed a lack > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>of activity > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>>on the list lately... > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>Hello all... > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>I find myself all the time overloading toString() of my > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>ActionForms > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>>>for > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>debugging > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>>purposes, so I can easily dump the current state of > >> > >>the object. > >> > >>>>>>>>I had > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>been doing > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>>this for each ActionForm class, specifically for it, but > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>it ocurrs to > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>>>me > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>that a > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>>general-purpose reflection-based approach would be better. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>I'd like to propose adding this functionality to the > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>ActionForm base > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>class. Here's > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>>the code I propose adding: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>import java.lang.reflect.Field; > >>>>>>>>public static final AVERAGE_FIELD_SIZE = 25; public String > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>toString() > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>>>{ > >>>>>>>>String str = ""; > >>>>>>>>StringBuffer sb = null; > >>>>>>>>try { > >>>>>>>> Field[] fields = this.getClass().getDeclaredFields(); > >>>>>>>> sb = new StringBuffer(fields.length * AVERAGE_FIELD_SIZE); > >>>>>>>> for (int i = 0; i < fields.length; i++) { > >>>>>>>> if (sb.length() > 0) { sb.append(", "); } > >>>>>>>> sb.append(fields[i].getName() + "=" + fields[i].get(this)); > >>>>>>>> } > >>>>>>>> str = sb.toString().trim(); > >>>>>>>>} catch (Exception e) { > >>>>>>>> str = "Exception in ActionForm.toString() : " + e; } return > >>>>>>>>str; } > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>The value of AVERAGE_FIELD_SIZE is a matter of debate, > >> > >>and it's > >> > >>>>>>>>of > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>course impossible > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>>to come up with a real value, so something reasonable is > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>the answer. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>>>25 > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>struck me > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>>as a decent starting point. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>What does everyone think? I find this functionality > >> > >>to be very > >> > >>>>>>>>useful > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>in my work, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>>and I suspect others may as well. The code doesn't add any > >>>>>>>>dependencies > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>outside > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>>J2SE, and it's certainly simple enough as to not be > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>particularly risky. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>>>Thanks all! > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>Frank W. Zammetti > >>>>>>>>Founder and Chief Software Architect Omnytex Technologies > >>>>>>>>http://www.omnytex.com > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>------------------------------------------------------------ > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>--------- > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>>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] > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>--------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > >>>>>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] > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>--------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > >>>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] > >> > >> > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > 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]
