Unfortunately, I don't think there is a way for us to tell whether the
request is being forwarded or not ;-(
Though, I suppose there could a flag or something, I suppose. But,
AFAIK, the developer would still have to set that.
What would be helpful would be for someone who is dealing with this
problem to make a concrete proposal.
Nathan Coast wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I think Bob's point is that if an action form has been populated once during
> a request, it would be useful if the reset wasn't called again. i.e. if the
> request was forwarded to other actions which use an action form of the same
> name, it'd be useful if form properties could be set during the first action
> and not reset before arriving at the second action. I've coded around this
> by setting request attributes in the first action and reading them in the
> second (ugly).
>
> I don't think anyone disagrees that it's essential the action forms are
> reset between requests.
>
> Cheers
> Nathan
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ted Husted [mailto:archive@jab.org]
> Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2001 1:14 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Forwarding Actions onto other Actions
>
> Unfortunately, calling reset is necessary. A primary reason is that that
> if a checkbox is unchecked then it will be ommitted from the request.
> This can give inconsistent results when a ActionForm is being returned
> for editing. The reset method gives the developer the opportunity to set
> the checkbox to a known state (to make up for the vagrancies of HTML).
>
> The abstract implementation of reset is empty. If a developer is going
> to reuse beans between requests, it is the developer's responsiblity to
> see that reset performs correctly.
>
> All the population also takes places through mutators that the developer
> defines. If there are circumstances where a ActionForm should not
> populate itself through the request, the developer can design the
> mutators accordingly.
>
> -- Ted Husted, Husted dot Com, Fairport NY USA.
> -- Custom Software ~ Technical Services.
> -- Tel +1 716 737-3463
> -- http://www.husted.com/about/struts/
>
> Bob Rullo wrote:
> >
> > Ted,
> >
> > I did see that check in the processActionForm method, but if you notice,
> in
> > the processPopulate which is called right after the processActionForm call
> > you'll see that the bean, no matter where it came from, gets reset and
> then
> > populated with the request parameters via the RequestUtil.populate method.
> >
> > Am I missing something here? Sure seems like it'll reset the form bean no
> > matter what which to me, isn't desirable.
> >
> > -Bob
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Ted Husted" <archive@jab.org>
> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2001 6:04 AM
> > Subject: Re: Forwarding Actions onto other Actions
> >
> > > There is actually just such a check, though this would be a very good
> > > suggestion if there weren't ;-)
> > >
> > > See processActionForm in ActionServlet.
> > >
> > > Please let us know if you see anything else.
> > >
> > > -- Ted Husted, Husted dot Com, Fairport NY USA.
> > > -- Custom Software ~ Technical Services.
> > > -- Tel +1 716 737-3463
> > > -- http://www.husted.com/about/struts/
> > >
> > >
> > > Bob Rullo wrote:
> > > >
> > > > This is my first posting to the dev board so bare with me.
> > > >
> > > > >From what I've seen in looking in the ActionServlet code it appears
> > that
> > > > everytime a action is called the form instance for that action is
> placed
> > > > into the mapping.getScope( ). Shouldn't there be a check before to
> see
> > if
> > > > the ActionForm is already in the scope? Reason being that one action
> > could
> > > > make some modifications to a form instance and then forward it to
> > another
> > > > action that will make more changes to the form instance. Basically my
> > > > problem is that if two actions having the same form instance are
> called
> > in
> > > > the same request the form instance stored in the request will always
> be
> > > > overridden by the last action.
> > > >
> > > > I propose that we should do a check before each action to determine if
> > the
> > > > form already exists in the desired scope. If so, use the scoped
> > instance,
> > > > if not, build the form instance off of the request parameters as it is
> > now.
> > > >
> > > > If this was by design, could someone shed some light to why?
> > > >
> > > > Thank you for your help,
> > > > -Bob
>
> **********************************************************************
> This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
> intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
> are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
> the system manager.
>
> This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by
> MIMEsweeper at LevelSeas for the presence of computer viruses.
>
> www.mimesweeper.com
> **********************************************************************
