Wow! Didn't realize this big change. I think updates should not happen unless validations pass. You run the risk of triggering unwanted validation exceptions *inside* your domain objects that will prevent normal form processing from operating.
On 8/23/05, Paul Ferraro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ben is right. Currently, values are bound only if translation succeeds > (this is essential), but before validation happens. > This was done purposefully to support "Save" style logic, since > validation errors can optionally be ignored in the triggered form > listener by ignoring the value of IValidationDelegate.getHasErrors(). > I put this logic in place before the veto logic was implemented (I think > - although I work probably overlapped). This is easy enough to change. > In 3.0, ValidField values could only be bound if and only if validation > succeeded since the old IValidators were responsible for both > translation and validation. > Since this limitation no longer exists, we have the option of binding > value either before or after the validators run. > > What are the advantages/disadvantages to each approach? > > Paul > > Howard Lewis Ship wrote: > > >Validation does not work that way, not to my knowledge. Even with the > >new validation, the translator and validators all have veto power, by > >throwing ValidationException, before an update occurs to the bound > >property. > > > >TAPESTRY-369 was a suggestion that was since judged invalid. It is not > >how Tapestry operates. > > > >On 8/23/05, Ben Pryor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > >>Hi, > >> > >> I'm upgrading a large Tapestry 3 application to Tapestry 4. One > >>unexpected behavior is that the new validation system appears to always > >>update a form component's bound property before doing validation and > >>recording any errors. There is a JIRA issue from July that mentions this > >>behavior (http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAPESTRY-369). The > >>problem is that almost everywhere in our application we expect the > >>bound property to only be updated if validation succeeds. > >> > >>How do others handle this situation with the new validation? Should the > >>validation system be flexible enough to allow for sometimes updating the > >>bound property when in error and sometimes not? > >> > >>Thanks, > >> Ben > >> > >>--------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- Howard M. Lewis Ship Independent J2EE / Open-Source Java Consultant Creator, Jakarta Tapestry Creator, Jakarta HiveMind Professional Tapestry training, mentoring, support and project work. http://howardlewisship.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
