Doh. I was being very stupid - I looked in the XWork source and
realised it's really straightforward.
I'm blaming this one of lack of sleep :)
Cheers,
Andy.
On 25 Jan 2009, at 01:25, Wes Wannemacher wrote:
On Saturday 24 January 2009 20:17:49 Andy Sykes wrote:
Actually, having an interceptor makes some sense in this case.
How can interceptors "short circuit" the stack and action to return a
result code? The ideal situation here would be that the "protector"
interceptor is above the validation interceptor, checks for the form
token, and chucks an error result code, protecting the validators
from
null parameters and so on.
Well, the invoke method returns a string indicating which result to
dispatch
to. Take a look at a few of the other interceptors to see. For
instance, if
validation fails, the validation interceptor returns "input".
I can't see anything in the documentation about achieving this - the
ActionInvocation javadoc suggests that
ActionInvocation.setResultCode() will not short-circuit the stack,
and
that the action's own result code will override the interceptor-set
result.
When an interceptor calls invocation.invoke() it either moves to the
next
interceptor, or calls the method, depending on where it is in the
stack. It
fairly intuitive.
--
Wes Wannemacher
Author - Struts 2 In Practice
Includes coverage of Struts 2.1, Spring, JPA, JQuery, Sitemesh and
more
http://www.manning.com/wannemacher
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscr...@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: user-h...@struts.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscr...@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: user-h...@struts.apache.org
