/show_bug.cgi?id=27870
validator inheritance
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution
/show_bug.cgi?id=27870
validator inheritance
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-03-29 11:17 ---
Created an attachment (id=11025)
Updated patch with latest cvs content (made protected process method
Please attach cvs diff -u formatted patches to a bugzilla ticket so they
don't get lost in the mailing list.
Thanks,
David
--- Nacho Gonzalez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Here are the diff files for validator_1_0.dtd,
org.apache.commons.validator.FormSet and
org.apache.commons.validator.Form. I
/show_bug.cgi?id=27870
validator inheritance
Summary: validator inheritance
Product: Commons
Version: unspecified
Platform: All
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Severity: Enhancement
Priority: Other
Component
/show_bug.cgi?id=27870
validator inheritance
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-03-23 15:02 ---
Created an attachment (id=10920)
inheritance extension patch
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED
/show_bug.cgi?id=27870
validator inheritance
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-03-23 15:11 ---
Created an attachment (id=10921)
Inheritance TestCase (.java file)
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED
/show_bug.cgi?id=27870
validator inheritance
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-03-23 15:12 ---
Created an attachment (id=10922)
Inheritance TestCase (validation.xml file)
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL
/show_bug.cgi?id=27870
validator inheritance
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-03-23 15:16 ---
I didn't follow exactly the Tiles pattern as it would imply quite a few more
changes. I believe solving inheritance is naturally part of the process method
anyway.
I don't know
Here are the diff files for validator_1_0.dtd,
org.apache.commons.validator.FormSet and
org.apache.commons.validator.Form. I have also done the tests. Should I
include them as plain text or attach them? The test would be a
validation.xml file and the TestCase.
I didn't follow exactly the
Here is the aproach I was thinking of. I beleive there should only be
changes in no more than 2 classes and 1 file:
validator.dtd:!ATTLIST formname CDATA #REQUIRED
extends CDATA
#IMPLIED
This functionality would be very useful, especially for
internationalized forms. I would be willing to apply
any patches, given that it maintains
compatability. JUnit tests would also be needed.
-Rob
-Original Message-
From: Nacho Gonzalez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Here is the
The methods getFields() and getFieldMap() should include
super.getFields() and super.getFieldMap() making them Unmodifiable after
merging.
There would not be true inheritance though, this would be a reference to the extended
map. Take a look the Tiles implementation,
this would be a good
]
Subject: RE: validator inheritance
Yeah, I've got to start working on it now and understand I'll have to
adapt to what changes you guys are making. Would it be OK to discuss
what kind of work you guys are doing among us?
Here's what we've done for 1.1:
Refactored the validations into separate
13 matches
Mail list logo
