tapestry-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Richard Lewis-Shell" <rlewissh...@mac.com>
Subject To enhance or not?
Date Tue, 23 Dec 2003 09:16:37 GMT
OK, I've now done a little testing with not enhancing custom parameter
binding properties...

By changing ComponentClassFactory so it only enhances custom parameters IF
they are genuinely abstract (as opposed to missing which is how the current
code works), and reverting AbstractComponent.get/setBinding() so they no
longer assume there will always be binding properties, but instead checks
for such a property first, it works.  Classes do not require enhancing just
because they have a custom parameter, and ALL Tapestry's tests pass (and so
do all our app's tests to boot).

To my mind this is a big improvement, especially for large Tapestry
applications.  eg. our app has over 550 components, so by making this
change, there are around 550 classes that do not require enhancing, thus
around 550 less classes requiring loading/tracking, and 550 classes that are
easier to debug.

The drawback?  Apart from adding a little extra complexity to the framework
as Harish raises, technically it's a teeny weeny API change (because some
classes no longer have set/getXYZBinding methods) and I think at this late
beta stage we're not supposed to be making those.  However, it is only the
property for the binding itself, not the actual parameter value, so I think
it unlikely to have a significant effect.  And did I mention teeny/weeny?
:-)

As always, let me know your thoughts...

R




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


Mime
View raw message