ginal Message -
From: Lenny Primak
To: Tapestry development
Sent: Thursday, July 04, 2013 6:18 PM
Subject: Re: Copy annotations from servce implementation to proxies
I think you want Tapestry's very light JPA implementation to do way more than
what it was meant to do original
rk that way.
>
> John
> - Original Message -
> From: Thiago H de Paula Figueiredo
> To: Tapestry development
> Sent: Friday, June 28, 2013 2:27 PM
> Subject: Copy annotations from servce implementation to proxies
>
>
> On Thu, 27 Ju
that way.
John
- Original Message -
From: Thiago H de Paula Figueiredo
To: Tapestry development
Sent: Friday, June 28, 2013 2:27 PM
Subject: Copy annotations from servce implementation to proxies
On Thu, 27 Jun 2013 06:05:14 -0300, wrote:
> Hello,
> John
On Fri, 28 Jun 2013 20:20:43 -0300, Howard Lewis Ship
wrote:
As I remember it, I changed the API so that a search for an annotation
on a service will also check the service implementation ... so rather
than
"copy" the annotations (which is very, very problematic), the code looks
into two
As I remember it, I changed the API so that a search for an annotation on a
service will also check the service implementation ... so rather than
"copy" the annotations (which is very, very problematic), the code looks
into two places. Take a peek at implementations of AnnotationProvider.
On Fri,
Oops, now I realized my suggestion was written in a bad way. It's about
Tapestry-IoC services, not Tapestry(-core).
What I'm actually suggesting is beyond that: it's about copying the
annotations on service implementation *methods* to their corresponding
methods in the service proxy. This w
It is pointless to get into design improvements to Tapestry IoC along these
lines, but I would certainly do things a bit differently, now that Plastic
is available in the arsenal. I think a hypotehtical IoC would do much more
bytecode manipualtion ala components and pages; I also had some interesti
Yes, but it is optional. Anything you don't want to specify using an
annotation on the interface can be specified instead using the
ServiceBinder interface, or as an annotation on a module method.
Ok, in this case, if you want to use the Tapestry-specific magic, you get
to use the Tapestry-specif
On Thu, 27 Jun 2013 06:05:14 -0300, wrote:
Hello,
John has commented on
http://tapestry.apache.org/integrating-with-jpa.html.
You can find the comment here:
http://tapestry.apache.org/integrating-with-jpa.html#comment_1410
Please note that if the comment contains a hyperlink, it must be appr
