On 5/7/2010 5:39 PM, Jeff Schnitzer wrote: > I doublechecked the spec and the current Resin behavior is the proper > behavior. I don't think this behavior has changed in the spec, so the > old behavior was a bug. You can't use the empty operator to test for > the existence of fields (or methods). >
Okidoke. > As to the rationale for the spec... it does make some amount of sense, > helping to reduce one very common type of bug (I'm getting properties > of a ThingA and the object turns out to be a ThingB). I'm sure all > the arguments for static typing vs duck typing apply here. > That's a bummer. I preferred the old behavior as it's closer to JavaScript associative arrays, which are nice and flexible. But mainly because we were relying on that behavior. :) > Note: There is nothing special about the empty operator; expressions > are resolved as normal and then the result is tested for null or empty > collection. If expression evaluation ever tries to access a field or > method that doesn't exist on an object, the EL resolver throws > PropertyNotFoundException or MethodNotFoundException. > > Jeff > _______________________________________________ resin-interest mailing list resin-interest@caucho.com http://maillist.caucho.com/mailman/listinfo/resin-interest
