Yes, that is what I meant. It's not just primitive types though. I thought it was all non bean-references that were not autowired but apparently arrays and certain collections get wired as well. In retrospect I do think that it is a bit much to add. there a somewhat-acceptable workaround in which I can assume a bean (action) name in the generalized configuration file (make it pretty unique) and simply require implementations to use the same name in their spring configurations. The dependence is still in the right direction. I'll just do that for now.
thanks, eric On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 6:45 PM, Musachy Barroso <musa...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 11:12 PM, Obinna<obi...@gmail.com> wrote: > > (This is by-design and should be > > considered a *feature*.) > > That statement always makes me laugh. When you said "ANY STATIC > PROPERTIES SET IN CONFIGURATION ARE IGNORED", do you mean beans of > primitive type? > > You also need to consider how useful it would be for other users. If > you don't foresee many people taking advantage of it, then adding > complexity to the code is not worth it, specially in the spring world, > where it is so easy to plugin your own stuff. > > musachy > -- > "Hey you! Would you help me to carry the stone?" Pink Floyd > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscr...@struts.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: user-h...@struts.apache.org > >
