RE : [Springframework-developer] Re: [Springframework-developer] Tags

[Jean-Pierre <jp...@jp...>]

Looked at code, it seems it's done this way. Better, the whole
collection of Exceptions is thrown. So normally, all the bounds are
currently done.

Jean-Pierre

-----Message d'origine-----
De=A0: spr...@li...
[mailto:spr...@li...] De la
part de jp....@ti...
Envoy=E9=A0: mercredi 20 ao=FBt 2003 18:14
=C0=A0: kk
Cc=A0: juergen.hoeller; springframework-developer
Objet=A0: [Springframework-developer] Re: [Springframework-developer] =
Tags

Ken,

You highlight a second issue (remainings bindings). The first was due in
my case as you could see by the use of nested properties.
The best way for this second issue would be, I think, to rewrite the
BeanWrapperImpl in order to catch and store exceptions during the
binding and then rethrow the first one when all bindings are done.

Jean-Pierre

---------- Initial Header -----------

From      : Ken Krebs <kk...@kk...>
To          : "jp....@ti..." <jp....@ti...>
Cc          : "j=FCrgen h=F6ller =
[werk3AT]"<jue...@we...>,
'spring-dev-list' <spr...@li...>
Date      : Wed, 20 Aug 2003 10:43:29 -0500
Subject : Re: [Springframework-developer] Tags

JP,

Petclinic shows an example of this on the add/edit Pet forms and the=20
addVisit form. Look at the messages.properties for the typeMismatch=20
messages.

I got a reply from Juergen when I queried about this situation (sent on=20
17-JUN). See my original message and the reply below.

As to keeping the data intact, your FormController should set the=20
sessionForm property to true. In petclinic, this is done in the=20
constructor. The date editor is setup in
AbstractClinicForm.initBinder().

There is a problem with this technique in that this process will retain=20
the bad date data that was entered but not other subsequent data on the=20
form as it seems to short circuit the rest of the binding process. Try=20
entering something in the Description field on the addVisit form. Then=20
enter a bad date, submit and see what happens. Perhaps I'm not doing it=20
quite right ??

Initially, I tried to work around the ugly stacktrace message I was=20
getting by creating my own date editor and trapping the ParseException=20
and setting the field to null, thereby handing it off to the validator.=20
Ideally, it would be nice if the custom editor would participate in the=20
same way as validators do, IMO.

Regards,
Ken