tapestry-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Richard Lewis-Shell" <rlewissh...@mac.com>
Subject Re: form listeners
Date Wed, 19 May 2004 22:00:25 GMT
I am all for "delayed listeners" too.  In all the Tapestry projects I have
been involved with (now 2!), it's just about the first thing implemented.
In fact this was one of the first questions I asked about Tapestry 3 or so
years ago, when Howard advised using tag/selected to pull it off, and I am
still using it!  The downside to using this method is that each submitting
component has to know where to store the delayed listener (the selected
parameter) - I have always used a property in a common Page superclass.  So
it would be great if Tapestry would handle this.  Does your "delayed
listener" proposal have the listener invoked before or after the form
listener?  Perhaps both would be needed, though that means two more
parameters to the submitting components.

R

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mindbridge" <mindbridgeweb@yahoo.com>
To: "Tapestry development" <tapestry-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
Sent: Wednesday, May 19, 2004 11:45 PM
Subject: Re: form listeners


> > Any disagreements?
>
> Yes, to the proposal in that form. Unfortunately, this is totally backward
> incompatible and will cause a hell of a lot of chaos if one were to
upgrade
> from 3.0 to 3.1.
>
> There have been a lot of discussions about this in the past -- search for
> "delayed listeners".
>
> The proposal that I personally favour at the moment is to add new,
> additional listener parameters (e.g. 'delayedListener') to all of the
> components that currently have a listener (they are quite a few). Those
> delayed listeners would be invoked after the form goes through the rewind
> process, but before the form's listener is invoked. Basically the
invocation
> sequence becomes:
>
> - form rewind + normal listeners
> - delayed listeners
> - form listener
>
> This provides the needed behaviour and the old listeners are preserved.
>
> (one other possibility is to have the form component also provide a
> delayedListener and adjust the invocation sequence appropriately, but I
> pesonally do not see any reason to do that)
>
> Overall, however, there is a great need to have something like this
> implemented.
>
> -mb
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Jamie Orchard-Hays" <jamie@dang.com>
> To: "Tapestry development" <tapestry-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 19, 2004 4:28 PM
> Subject: form listeners
>
>
> > I encountered unexpected behavior with form listeners yesterday (thanks
> > Howard for telling me how things work). I had some Hidden components
> listed
> > in my form *after* my LinkSubmit components. Since the listeners were
> > rendered in rewind before the Hidden components, the Hidden values kept
> > coming up null. Listeners should be called at the end of the form
rewind,
> > just before the form listener. I propose to modify the processing to
work
> > this way. Any disagreements?
> >
> > Jamie
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
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