Mailing-List: contact dev-help@struts.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Struts Developers List" <dev@struts.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: domain of ted.husted@gmail.com designates
 64.233.162.199 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
        s=beta; d=gmail.com;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth;
        b=PTbbB9LVqrTgUyJG8epb9NLTRsVq0zmIiMFHIhxWpEj55QE9kFIT2/KbSN1UBmPGJE2527hQoOqhZUSzZuLI19puouhuXXdhMK6V/l2SZKeQriDViH6KcM/nk5XgwWgAQjB+gCHXb34glPV7M7Sz8//u7iFysDookTcw08ibl5E=
Message-ID: <8b3ce3790608251157ke990096s777175000ca2f00e@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2006 14:57:46 -0400
From: "Ted Husted" <husted@apache.org>
Sender: ted.husted@gmail.com
To: "Struts Developers List" <dev@struts.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [s2] Action ! Method syntax (was Freemarker transform name)
In-Reply-To: <44EF45C9.5040408@fdar.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: 
 <700741.1156443195851.JavaMail.os-j2ee@opensymphony01.managed.contegix.com>
	 <13398660.1156443746971.JavaMail.os-j2ee@opensymphony01.managed.contegix.com>
	 <8b3ce3790608241313v3bb9c1bcs52656d309b5111f3@mail.gmail.com>
	 <44EF45C9.5040408@fdar.com>

On 8/25/06, Ian Roughley <ian@fdar.com> wrote:
> I've also used the ! notation extensively, and am disappointed that it
> is being removed.

No one ever suggested that it be removed. It's been suggested that we
try to replicate the same functionality with wildcards. I tried it
myself in an example, and it seemed to work just fine.

> One thing that I have not seen any mention of yet is conflicting
> mappings - what happens? Which has the priority?  What happens if larger
> application want one to take preference in one circumstance, and a
> different one under another scenario?  I would argue that a sufficiently
> large application has not been converted to ensure these issues would
> not arise.

Which is why we added the switch. So people could try things
alternatives and see how well they worked.

-Ted.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org