On 6/29/05, Allen Gilliland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > *Data.remove() is available to users (try $website.remove() in a template)
This method should probably be removed from the classes. While I think even POJOs should contain some business logic, I don't feel that persistence-related methods are appropriate. Because this is only my personal gut-check, I've never objected. > PageHelper.evaluateString() is available to users (this one actually bit us > in the ass already and a user caught themself in a recursive loop which > killed the server) I'm the one guilty of creating that monstrosity, and I say "get rid of it". I doubt it is in my real use - but you may break a few pages by removing it. Perhaps change it to print "THIS MACRO HAS BEEN REMOVED"? Note: this is a misguided macro, not a Context value. > Some of these may be a simple case of updating the public, protected, private > access levels on methods, but some cases may mean removing objects from the > Context and/or removing methods from objects that are part of the Context. All of the objects placed into the Context are done so to achieve an objective in the *.vm templates or the Page templates. As I implied above, let's look at what is being exposed by these objects that may be 'dangerous' instead. Lance
