Re: ActionForm.validateForm(...) to replace ActionForm.validate(...)

Fri, 03 Dec 2004 18:48:09 -0800

Wouldn't it be kind of us to at least return a boolean indicator of whether there were any validation issues? I suppose we could check the ValidationContext once the validateForm method returns, but it does seem a nice convenience to return a boolean indicator ...

Eddie

----- Original Message ----- From: "Niall Pemberton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Struts Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, December 03, 2004 8:12 PM
Subject: Re: ActionForm.validateForm(...) to replace ActionForm.validate(...)


I wasn't proposing changing the validation model at all - but with the
advent of Chain we could deprecate the validate(mapping, request) method in
favour of a validate(Context) method in ActionForm. This would provide more
flexibility and cause less confusion because the method name has stayed the
same. I would also suggest that the new validate method shouldn't return
anything, with the ActionForm being responsible for sticking the messages in
the Context. That way if/when thing move to commons resources we won't face
the same problem again.

Niall

----- Original Message ----- From: "Joe Germuska" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Niall Pemberton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Struts Developers
List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, December 03, 2004 9:09 PM
Subject: Re: ActionForm.validateForm(...) to replace
ActionForm.validate(...)


At 8:41 PM +0000 12/3/04, Niall Pemberton wrote:
>Wouldn't it be better to get rid of this in 1.3 with the move to Chain?
>Doesn't everything get thrown up in the air and re-defined at that point
>including Action's being deprecated in favour of objects that just
implement 
>the Command interface?

I guess I had figured on 1.3 being more transitional than that.  But,
even if one were to use a command instead of an action, we haven't
talked (yet) about changing the validation model.

I haven't heard anyone propose a major change to the model of "Struts
populates an ActionForm and calls a method on it which tests its
validity and is able to return a bundle of messages explaining
validation errors if there are any."  My preference would be to defer
any changes that dramatic until 1.4, although with the chain, it
would be a little easier for people to prototype those kinds in the
sandbox or on SourceForge (or whereever...)

Perhaps it is worth trying to come up with a more future proof
implementation, though.  This isn't a burning issue -- clearly people
are confused about the ActionMessages/ActionErrors situation, but I
think that's "under control."  By future-proof, I mean something that
passes in the resources-equivalent of ActionMessages, and possibly
which passes in something like a "ValidationContext" which would
eliminate the explicit dependency on HttpServletRequest.

Joe



>Niall
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Martin Cooper" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: "Struts Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Sent: Friday, December 03, 2004 7:59 PM
>Subject: Re: ActionForm.validateForm(...) to replace
>ActionForm.validate(...)
>
>
>> We did just get Commons Resources promoted out of the sandbox, and >> I'm
>> hopeful that we'll get that puppy released soon. Finally!
>>
>> --
>> Martin Cooper
>>
>>
>> On Fri, 3 Dec 2004 11:37:38 -0800 (PST), David Graham
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > We didn't do it earlier because we wanted to use commons-resources
for
>> > message passing. That hasn't happened so we may as well add the
>> > validateForm() method and deprecate validate().
>> >
>> > David
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --- Joe Germuska <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> > > In order to push forward on full deprecation of ActionErrors, I
>> > > propose adding the following method to ActionForm:
>> > >
>> > > public ActionMessages validateForm(ActionMapping mapping,
>> > > >> HttpServletRequest
>request) {
>> > >
>> > > return validate(mapping, request);
>> > >
>> > > }
>> > >
>> > > and then changing one line in the Request Processing chain:
>> > >
>> > > ActionMessages errors = form.validate(mapping, request);
>> > > to
>> > > ActionMessages errors = form.validateForm(mapping,
request); 
>>  > >
>>  > > I'm not sure now why we haven't done this earlier.  Someone
suggested
>> > > it on one of the lists a while ago and it seemed clear once I saw
it,
>> > > but I haven't had time to do anything about it.
>> > >
>> > > My inclination is to do this only on the 1.3 (HEAD) branch, and >> to
>> > > make the change in RequestProcessor.java even though it is slated
for 
>>  > > obsolescence, and then also to make the change in
>>  > > o.a.s.chain.AbstractValidateActionForm (which actually still uses
>>  > > ActionErrors, actually.)
>>  > >
>>  > > If it didn't seem strange that it hasn't been done already, I
might
>> > > have just gone ahead and done it without raising the question --
so 
>>  > > I'm wondering if I'm missing something?
>>  > >
>>  > > Joe
>>  > >
>>  > > --
>>  > > Joe Germuska
>>  > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>  > > http://blog.germuska.com
>>  > > "Narrow minds are weapons made for mass destruction"  -The Ex
>>  > >
>>  >
---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>  > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>  > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>  > > >
>>  > >
>>  >
>>  >
>>  > __________________________________________________
>>  > Do You Yahoo!?
>>  > Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
>>  > http://mail.yahoo.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]


--
Joe Germuska
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://blog.germuska.com
"Narrow minds are weapons made for mass destruction"  -The Ex






---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]




---
avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
Virus Database (VPS): 0449-1, 12/02/2004
Tested on: 12/3/2004 8:49:54 PM
avast! - copyright (c) 2000-2004 ALWIL Software.
http://www.avast.com




---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to