Logging in Filters

[Darryl Pentz]

Am I correct to assume there is no implicit 'log' object in a filter. I know the docs don't mention one and the groovy compiler complains accordingly.

Is this planned for 1.0 Final?

Just curious.

- Darryl

[Darryl Pentz]

And I see there's no 'flash' object implicitly available either! I need that to indicate to the user that they need to login to perform the desired function.

What's the 'groovy' way of getting hold of the flash context from the filter? Or is that not possible?

- DP

Darryl Pentz wrote:

Am I correct to assume there is no implicit 'log' object in a filter. I know the docs don't mention one and the groovy compiler complains accordingly.

Is this planned for 1.0 Final?

Just curious.

- Darryl

[Darryl Pentz]

Last but not least, I see there are times when the actionName is null in my filter, which unfortunately screws with my security logic.

I assume this is because the filter intercepts the request at a point where the URL has not been properly mapped to a controller and its action? In this case, a call to /myapp/login yields controllerName = login, actionName = null.

Is this expected behaviour or a bug?

- DP

Darryl Pentz wrote:

Am I correct to assume there is no implicit 'log' object in a filter. I know the docs don't mention one and the groovy compiler complains accordingly.

Is this planned for 1.0 Final?

Just curious.

- Darryl

[justinedelson]

These all seem like issues that deserve to be entered in JIRA (separately).

The actionName thing seems especially wrong, so you should attach a sample application to the JIRA issue.

On Nov 8, 2007 5:39 PM, Darryl Pentz < djpentz@...> wrote:

Last but not least, I see there are times when the actionName is null in my
filter, which unfortunately screws with my security logic.

I assume this is because the filter intercepts the request at a point where
the URL has not been properly mapped to a controller and its action? In this
case, a call to /myapp/login yields controllerName = login, actionName =
null.

Is this expected behaviour or a bug?

- DP

Darryl Pentz wrote:

>
> Am I correct to assume there is no implicit 'log' object in a filter. I
> know the docs don't mention one and the groovy compiler complains
> accordingly.
>
> Is this planned for 1.0 Final?
>
> Just curious.
>
> - Darryl
>

--

View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Logging-in-Filters-tf4773800.html#a13657554

Sent from the grails - user mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list please visit:

   http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email