Re: Required parameters: also not null?

2008-06-25 Thread Kristian Marinkovic
don't forget the BeanEditorForm... object may as well be null Howard Lewis Ship [EMAIL PROTECTED] 25.06.2008 00:06 Bitte antworten an Tapestry users users@tapestry.apache.org An Tapestry users users@tapestry.apache.org Kopie Thema Re: Required parameters: also not null? Working

Re: Required parameters: also not null?

2008-06-24 Thread Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo
Em Tue, 24 Jun 2008 14:32:15 -0300, Matt Kerr [EMAIL PROTECTED] escreveu: why not specify whether params allow null - rather than break things ? default to the old behavior. it's not uncommon to have a null param - dunno why it would be different in a component. Agreed 100%. Required =

Re: Required parameters: also not null?

2008-06-24 Thread Filip S. Adamsen
+1 on something like that. -Filip On 2008-06-24 19:48, Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo wrote: Em Tue, 24 Jun 2008 14:32:15 -0300, Matt Kerr [EMAIL PROTECTED] escreveu: why not specify whether params allow null - rather than break things ? default to the old behavior. it's not uncommon to

Re: Required parameters: also not null?

2008-06-24 Thread Howard Lewis Ship
True, my concern is that we'll find that every use of required=true also has acceptNull=false, in which case we add complexity without providing value. On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 12:12 PM, Filip S. Adamsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: +1 on something like that. -Filip On 2008-06-24 19:48, Thiago H.