🚀 go-pugleaf

I disagree.  I am writing a bean, and I am the one responsible for creating
the methods.  So i dont have any such objects premade and handed to me.  I
am the maker in this event.  So my question is what should the maker of this
object do.  Or maybe Ill ask,  what should I expect to get in a property
veto exception?  the event will contain difrerent objects for old and even
though the change was vetoed??




--
Peace,


Carl L. Gilbert
http://www.rigidsoftware.com
ICQ 614395-currently stolen working to retrieve.

"Then said I, Wisdom [is] better than strength: nevertheless the poor man's
wisdom [is] despised, and his words are not heard." Ecclesiastes 9:16

"Torsten Welches" <torsten.welches@who.cares.netcologne.de> wrote in message
news:3b3da103_1@dnews...
> dnoyeB > schrieb in Nachricht <3b3cee8f$1_2@dnews>...
> >When I fire a property veto exception it requires a property change
object
> >within it.
> >
> >Now since this change is vetoed, should oldvalue and newvalue both be
> >oldvalue?? since I really am not setting the newvalue?
>
> you don't create a new PropertyChangeEvent, rather you throw a
> PropertyVetoException inside a vetoableChange method of a
> VetoableChangeListener implementation. You get the PropertyChangeEvent as
a
> parameter, inspect the property change and fire a PropertyVetoException if
> you are not happy with the change. You send the original
PropertyChangeEvent
> with your exception.
>
> Here's some pseudo code (I have no JDK available at the moment, so don't
> mind any syntax errors):
>
> class SomeClass implements VetoableChangeListener {
>     ...
>     public void vetoableChange(PropertyChangeEvent pce) {
>         if (!pce.getNewValue().isWhatYouHadExpected()) {
>             throw new  PropertyVetoException("I don't like this new
value",
> pce);
>         }
>     }
>     ...
> }
>
> Torsten
>
>
>
>