RE: [way, way OT] okay, one more time for the slow people...

[James Mitchell <jm...@telocity.com>]

Hey Eddie,  I don't think Vic meant YOU personally :/

When I read it, I felt he meant posters "in general".

I also post code snippets all the time, in fact, I often won't post any code
unless I have already compiled and tested it (untrue if I'm in a hurry, and
those will always have a disclaimer).

(I hope this thread doesn't become another flame war.)

 pot.addCents(.02f);

James Mitchell
Software Engineer\Struts Evangelist
Struts-Atlanta, the "Open Minded Developer Network"
http://www.open-tools.org/struts-atlanta




> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eddie Bush [mailto:ekbush@swbell.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 10:44 AM
> To: Struts Users Mailing List
> Subject: Re: okay, one more time for the slow people...
>
>
> V. Cekvenich wrote:
> <snip/>
>
> > Some posters on mail list only do philosophical answers, but if I show
> > code, I can live with the critiqe, it makes it a better design.
>
> <snip/>
>
> Vic, don't take this wrong :-)  I think you're doing a lot of good, and
> I certainly wouldn't want to offend you:
>
> My approach is to KISS my answers :-)  Yes, there are times when a
> person needs additional guidance - let them ask for it.  To be quite
> forward, I personally believe it is a "best practice" to point people to
> good resources and let them get ideas for their implementation there.
>  Being developers worth our salt (!) we shouldn't always need a
> full-blown code example.  Omitting the code and giving a "quick
> overview" is often done by me because of one of:
>
>     - I've already posted code for a given solution at least a
> couple times
>     - I think the person shows an obvious lack of self-discipline to go
> acitvely learn the technology
>         (In which case, I do not see it as my job to do
> everything for them)
>     - I believe the references I give can speak volumes more than any
> code snippit I could post
>     - It saves bandwidth
>
> I'm all for helping people out, and I do fully realize there are times
> when thoughts can't be conveyed in a better form than with a code
> sample, however I also believe that for those people that are willing to
> put a little work into it, direction is more important (and better) than
> spoon-feeding :-)
>
> Just my opinion ;-)  You'll notice that I do post solid examples when
> it's obvious to me someone needs them.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Eddie
>
> --
> Eddie Bush
>
>
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
<ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail:
<ma...@jakarta.apache.org>



--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Nested Multibox (Dummy) Question

[Brandon Goodin <ma...@phase.ws>]

Greetings,

Here is a seemingly minor issue.. Any thoughts?

What i want is to iterate over a list of beans and produce checkboxes that
can be selected to delete records. The checkbox references the
someListBean.id property and i want the value to be the same as
someListBean.property without all the checkboxes being checked initially
(ex. final output: <input type="checkbox" name="someListBean[0].id"
value="123">). Is this possible or am I barfing up the wrong tree :-D. I was
thinking what i might have to do is to add a boolean to my beans. Something
like isSelected()/setSelected() and use the regular checkbox along with a
hidden form element of the same index with an id value equal to my record.
Then when the values are passed back to my FormBean and my nested beans auto
populated they will set the boolean as well. Then i can just check my bean
values on the back. But, I felt like this is adding web tier elements to my
model. Is there any way to handle this without cluttering my model beans
with a "selected" property?

So the goals are:
- Create checkboxes with id values
- Have dot notation referencing beans that are nested in my FormBean
- Make them initially unchecked

Reason:

Because the only beans to be populated on the back will contain the id of
the records to be deleted. Therefore i create less objects on the back and
can pass those beans to a generic auto delete function using OJB PB API. It
just makes life WAY easier for me :-D.

My code looks like the following:

<nested:form action="someAction.do" method="post">
<nested:iterate propery="someList">
<nested:multibox property="id"><nested:write property="id"
/></nested:multibox>
</nested:iterate>
</nested:form>

P.S. Struts + Nested Tags + OJB = simplicity :-D



--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: [way, way OT] okay, one more time for the slow people...

[Eddie Bush <ek...@swbell.net>]

Yeah - no flame.  I should probably refrain from posting when I've had 
little coffee in the morning.  The reasons I give for not posting code 
all the time are valid though :-)  Hopefully Vic and I are both "big 
enough" that neither of us takes offense to the other's comments. 
 That's why my first paragraph was there - so he knew I wasn't being 
mean-spirited ;-)

Peace :-D
<goes-to-get-more-coffee/>  (hey, back off, I was up late last night too 
- I deserve the right to come in late! ;-)

James Mitchell wrote:

>Hey Eddie,  I don't think Vic meant YOU personally :/
>
>When I read it, I felt he meant posters "in general".
>
>I also post code snippets all the time, in fact, I often won't post any code
>unless I have already compiled and tested it (untrue if I'm in a hurry, and
>those will always have a disclaimer).
>
>(I hope this thread doesn't become another flame war.)
>
> pot.addCents(.02f);
>
>James Mitchell
>Software Engineer\Struts Evangelist
>Struts-Atlanta, the "Open Minded Developer Network"
>http://www.open-tools.org/struts-atlanta
>

-- 
Eddie Bush




--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>