There shouldn't be any problems, but there's no real problems w/o the interceptor move or adding another one, either--it's just a higher-than-necessary log level.
Dave --- On Fri, 10/10/08, Torsten Krah <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From: Torsten Krah <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: s:checkBox - (Un)Setting works, but ParametersInterceptor still > issues an Error (Exception) > To: "Struts Users Mailing List" <user@struts.apache.org> > Date: Friday, October 10, 2008, 12:01 PM > Am Freitag, 10. Oktober 2008 17:37:44 schrieb Dave Newton: > > Do you have the checkbox interceptor in your stack? Is > it before your > > params interceptor? > > I am using the included paramsPrepareParamsStack. > > There the first params interceptor is defined before the > checkbox one and > after the second params one. > I guess thats the problem, right? > > Placing a second checkbox interceptor right before the > first params one, the > error is gone. > Is this be safe, might there be any problem doing this? > > Torsten > > -- > Bitte senden Sie mir keine Word- oder PowerPoint-Anhänge. > Siehe > http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.de.html > > Really, I'm not out to destroy Microsoft. That will > just be a > completely unintentional side effect." > -- Linus Torvalds --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
