Hi Chris, i already answered for the same, we have more than 50 modules and 1000 of Action classes. Doing what you say is not an easy task for us instead of adding a simple annotation on those method.
-- Thanks & Regards Srikanth Software Developer -------------------------------- eGovernments Foundations www.egovernments.org Mob : 9980078913 -------------------------------- On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 11:55 PM, Chris Pratt <thechrispr...@gmail.com>wrote: > Why not just take your action and move the Preparable interface and > prepare() function to a subclass with the methods that require it's > support? Seems a lot easier than creating more infrastructure. > (*Chris*) > > > On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 11:22 AM, Sreekanth S. Nair < > sreekanth.n...@egovernments.org> wrote: > > > Okay, i can create one for mine, leaving to struts2 framework developer > > whether strust2 need an annotation like @SkipPrepare. Thanks for your > > support Dave. > > > > -- > > Thanks & Regards > > Srikanth > > Software Developer > > -------------------------------- > > eGovernments Foundations > > www.egovernments.org > > Mob : 9980078913 > > -------------------------------- > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 11:42 PM, Dave Newton <davelnew...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > Technically it already *is* part of S2 in the MethodFilterInterceptor > > > class. > > > > > > I'm not particularly excited about an annotation to skip Prepareable, > but > > > I'm not fundamentally opposed, either. > > > > > > Dave > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 2:07 PM, Sreekanth S. Nair < > > > sreekanth.n...@egovernments.org> wrote: > > > > > > > The idea is precisely good, thats what i wanted but do you think it > > will > > > be > > > > a good addition to strust2 framework by any chance then i hope the > same > > > > could be a part of struts2 framework itself. > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Thanks & Regards > > > > Srikanth > > > > Software Developer > > > > -------------------------------- > > > > eGovernments Foundations > > > > www.egovernments.org > > > > Mob : 9980078913 > > > > -------------------------------- > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 7:01 PM, Dave Newton <davelnew...@gmail.com> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > If you'll note in the docs the interceptor extends > > > > MethodFilterInterceptor, > > > > > so one trivial way to fix it is to configure the interceptor for > the > > > > > specific actions. > > > > > > > > > > Another option is to take the existing interceptor and extend it to > > > > support > > > > > something like annotations, a naming convention, etc. to skip > either > > > > > specific or general methods. > > > > > > > > > > E.g., if your validation call was always named the same thing, you > > > could > > > > > either configure the interceptor package-wide, or change the > prepare > > > > > interceptor to always skip preparation for methods annotated with > > > > > @DoNotPrepare, etc. > > > > > > > > > > Dave > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 9:19 AM, Sreekanth S. Nair < > > > > > sreekanth.n...@egovernments.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Too many methods :( needs its own prepare then. > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Thanks & Regards > > > > > > Srikanth > > > > > > Software Developer > > > > > > -------------------------------- > > > > > > eGovernments Foundations > > > > > > www.egovernments.org > > > > > > Mob : 9980078913 > > > > > > -------------------------------- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 6:37 PM, Dave Newton < > > davelnew...@gmail.com> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Did you try `prepareWhateverMethodThatNeedsPrepare`? I don't > > recall > > > > if > > > > > > that > > > > > > > works or not. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 7:24 AM, Sreekanth S. Nair < > > > > > > > sreekanth.n...@egovernments.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No i can't do that, because that Action contains other method > > > which > > > > > > needs > > > > > > > > Prepare, the only option i can think of is moving these Ajax > > > method > > > > > to > > > > > > > some > > > > > > > > other Action which is not extending Prepareable. But as of > now > > > its > > > > > very > > > > > > > > hard because so many resources i have to change. Any other > > idea? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > Thanks & Regards > > > > > > > > Srikanth > > > > > > > > Software Developer > > > > > > > > -------------------------------- > > > > > > > > eGovernments Foundations > > > > > > > > www.egovernments.org > > > > > > > > Mob : 9980078913 > > > > > > > > -------------------------------- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 4:44 PM, Paul Benedict < > > > > pbened...@apache.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Have you thought of removing the "implements Preparable" > from > > > > your > > > > > > > > action? > > > > > > > > > That will do it. > > > > > > > > > On Jul 26, 2013 6:12 AM, "Sreekanth S. Nair" < > > > > > > > > > sreekanth.n...@egovernments.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Suppose i need to call any ajax validation on the same > > > Action, > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > unnecessarily run in to prepare. Where that ajax > validation > > > > > doesn't > > > > > > > > > > required to call prepare. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > Thanks & Regards > > > > > > > > > > Srikanth > > > > > > > > > > Software Developer > > > > > > > > > > -------------------------------- > > > > > > > > > > eGovernments Foundations > > > > > > > > > > www.egovernments.org > > > > > > > > > > Mob : 9980078913 > > > > > > > > > > -------------------------------- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 4:40 PM, Paul Benedict < > > > > > > pbened...@apache.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Why would you want to bypass it? > > > > > > > > > > > On Jul 26, 2013 3:47 AM, "Sreekanth S. Nair" < > > > > > > > > > > > sreekanth.n...@egovernments.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Is there any annotation available to bypass prepare > > > method > > > > > > while > > > > > > > > > > invoking > > > > > > > > > > > > certain methods, just like @skipvalidation > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks & Regards > > > > > > > > > > > > Srikanth > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > e: davelnew...@gmail.com > > > > > > > m: 908-380-8699 > > > > > > > s: davelnewton_skype > > > > > > > t: @dave_newton <https://twitter.com/dave_newton> > > > > > > > b: Bucky Bits <http://buckybits.blogspot.com/> > > > > > > > g: davelnewton <https://github.com/davelnewton> > > > > > > > so: Dave Newton < > > http://stackoverflow.com/users/438992/dave-newton > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > e: davelnew...@gmail.com > > > > > m: 908-380-8699 > > > > > s: davelnewton_skype > > > > > t: @dave_newton <https://twitter.com/dave_newton> > > > > > b: Bucky Bits <http://buckybits.blogspot.com/> > > > > > g: davelnewton <https://github.com/davelnewton> > > > > > so: Dave Newton <http://stackoverflow.com/users/438992/dave-newton > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > e: davelnew...@gmail.com > > > m: 908-380-8699 > > > s: davelnewton_skype > > > t: @dave_newton <https://twitter.com/dave_newton> > > > b: Bucky Bits <http://buckybits.blogspot.com/> > > > g: davelnewton <https://github.com/davelnewton> > > > so: Dave Newton <http://stackoverflow.com/users/438992/dave-newton> > > > > > >
