RE: [Springframework-developer] Re: [springframework - Open Discu ssion] Two feature requests

[Kopylenko, D. <dko...@ac...>]

Backward compatible - +1

-----Original Message-----
From: j=FCrgen h=F6ller [werk3AT] [mailto:jue...@we...]=20
Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2004 2:10 PM
To: spr...@li...
Subject: [Springframework-developer] Re: [springframework - Open =
Discussion]
Two feature requests


Actually, this is extremely easy to implement: I've just adapted
DefaultXmlBeanDefinitionParser and it works nicely, still allowing for
<value> tags but also for text values as CDATA...
=20
Of course, I do appreciate the explicit notion of a value, but I guess =
we
should allow for this shortcut style too - we shouldn't force people =
into a
certain style here.
=20
If noone objects, I'll commit this promptly.
=20
Juergen
=20

________________________________

Von: j=FCrgen h=F6ller [werk3AT]
Gesendet: Di 17.02.2004 20:02
An: spr...@li...
Betreff: Fw: [springframework - Open Discussion] Two feature requests


Any thoughts on suggestion number 2? As I wrote in that forum, I've
considered that myself repeatedly...
=20
Juergen
=20

________________________________

Von: SourceForge.net [mailto:no...@so...]
Gesendet: Mo 16.02.2004 18:10
An: no...@so...
Betreff: [springframework - Open Discussion] Two feature requests




Read and respond to this message at:
https://sourceforge.net/forum/message.php?msg_id=3D2425898
By: aaron

Since there are no trackers...

I have two feature requests, and some comments

1) Add a default attribute to the ParameterMethodNameResolver.  =
Currently,
if the parameter is not present, this resolver just bombs all over... =
Having
a default would be trivial to implement and allow the developer to let =
the
application proceed when a parameter was not provided (no reason to =
pollute
the GET url)

2) This might be a religious issue, but it would be very convenient if =
the
requirement of using a nested <value> element in <property> elements, =
for
values was lifted.  Either there is CDATA (in which case we assume it's =
a
literal value), or there are nested elements.  Having both could simply
result in a configuration error.  This would save typing and lots of
cumbersome errors relating to not including the nested <value> element.
Also, some docs give examples with literals without this <value> =
element.

The other things I've run into is: in mapping handlers, although you =
can
inspect the request and response arguments, you cannot rewrite them =
(since
the interfaces do not provide mutators).  This makes using request =
wrappers
impossible.  I suggest another form of method signature for handlers =
which
take objects which hold a reference to HttpServletRequest and
HttpServletResponse respectively, instead of having those objects as =
direct,
immutable arguments.

To get around this I have overridden a handleRequestInternal method in =
my
controller and just call super.handleRequestInternal giving it my
HttpServletRequestWrapper.

______________________________________________________________________
You are receiving this email because you elected to monitor this forum. =
To
stop monitoring this forum, login to SourceForge.net and visit:
https://sourceforge.net/forum/unmonitor.php?forum_id=3D250339




-------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net is sponsored by: Speed Start Your Linux Apps Now.
Build and deploy apps & Web services for Linux with
a free DVD software kit from IBM. Click Now!
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1356&alloc_id438&op=3Dclick
_______________________________________________
Springframework-developer mailing list
Spr...@li...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/springframework-developer