[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MYFACES-655?page=comments#action_12331255
]
Craig McClanahan commented on MYFACES-655:
--
As Oliver points out, the current MyFaces behavior is definitely spec
compliant. Implementation of the clear() and putA
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MYFACES-655?page=comments#action_12331257
]
Mathias Broekelmann commented on MYFACES-655:
-
Thanks Craig for giving some light to this.
I still think there is a difference between optional an mandatory. If
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MYFACES-655?page=comments#action_12331258
]
Craig McClanahan commented on MYFACES-655:
--
Matthias has a fair question (about why the TCK requires
UnsupportedOperattionException) here. Forwarded to the spec le
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MYFACES-655?page=comments#action_12374808
]
Matthias Weßendorf commented on MYFACES-655:
Craig,
any updates?
Thx,
Matthias
> RequestMap doesn't implement putAll as it should
> ---
The single lamest thing is that the JSF spec doesn't explicitly say what methods should be supported.The second lamest thing is that the spec doesn't require that *all* methods be supported in all Maps, Lists, etc., across the board. I should've pushed that in
1.2, since it's been bugging me sinc
Good point!
Adam at his best - refreshing as always ;)
regards,
Martin
On 10/5/05, Adam Winer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The single lamest thing is that the JSF spec doesn't explicitly say what
> methods should be supported.
>
> The second lamest thing is that the spec doesn't require that *a
lvert
From: Adam Winer
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2005
6:53 PM
To: MyFaces Development
Subject: Re: [jira] Commented:
(MYFACES-655) RequestMap doesn't implement putAll as it should
The single lamest thing
is that the JSF spec doesn't explicitly s
