I'm concerned... what implications does this have? Why is this
something we should be fixing? This is a potentially dangerous thing
to be tampering with IMO.
On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 5:04 PM, Dan Allen <dan.j.allen(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 4:49 AM, Martin Marinschek
<mmarinschek(a)apache.org>
wrote:
>
> >> Right, I agree with you. I'm saying that this is silly behavior.
> >> Either it should leave null alone or choose to convert it only *if*
> >> the expected-type is a primitive (in this case a primitive boolean).
> >
> > +1
>
> I can certainly do so - however, I don't think that I will get any
> response amounting to this being fixed.
>
> Do you guys think we should fix this in the JSF implementations, by
> passing in java.lang.Object to the underlying EL expression, and doing
> the coercion ourselves? We - most of the time - wrap the
> value-expression in a Facelets TagValueExpression anyways, so we could
> certainly do this! If the RI team agrees, I can certainly give word
> out to the MyFaces team discussing if that is reasonable to us as
> well.
I think it would be more reasonable to try to handle this ourselves. As you
mentioned, there is already a layer in between, so it's not like this is a
one off solution. To be honest, I'm on the fence, but I also want to get rid
of annoyances sooner rather than later and that makes me lean towards a fix
in JSF.
-Dan
--
Dan Allen
Senior Software Engineer, Red Hat | Author of Seam in Action
Registered Linux User #231597
http://mojavelinux.com
http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction
http://www.google.com/profiles/dan.j.allen