Re: EmbeddedComponent Mixin: -1

Hi Thiago, On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 6:41 PM, Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo < thiag...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, 26 Aug 2011 08:12:10 -0300, Dragan Sahpaski < > dragan.sahpa...@gmail.com> wrote: > > OK I can see the problem here. But what do you think about the newly >> proposed concept to be abl

Re: EmbeddedComponent Mixin: -1

On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 10:21 PM, Josh Canfield wrote: > Depending on the internal implementation of an object makes your code > brittle. Depending on the internal implementation of a Component makes > your code brittle. > > @EmbeddedMixin is on par with using reflection to grab out private > fiel

Re: EmbeddedComponent Mixin: -1

I think the example got wiped away in the replies so here it is again: /** * This mixin is aplied to all embedded components of the component it is aplied to. * example:the mixin is aplied to grid, gridRows, gridCell etc. */ @EmbeddedComponents (@EmbeddedMixin whatever the naming is) public

Re: EmbeddedComponent Mixin: -1

On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 3:53 PM, Dragan Sahpaski wrote: > On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 10:07 PM, Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo < > thiag...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Thu, 25 Aug 2011 16:34:34 -0300, Dragan Sahpaski < >> dragan.sahpa...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Having the mixin application bound by component

Re: EmbeddedComponent Mixin: -1

On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 10:07 PM, Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo < thiag...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, 25 Aug 2011 16:34:34 -0300, Dragan Sahpaski < > dragan.sahpa...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi, >> > > Hi, Dragan! > > One solution I could think of was the EmbeddedMixin concept >> (demo

Re: EmbeddedComponent Mixin: -1

On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 1:21 PM, Josh Canfield wrote: > Depending on the internal implementation of an object makes your code > brittle. Depending on the internal implementation of a Component makes > your code brittle. Agree, lots of other things make your implementation brittle as well. > @Emb

Re: EmbeddedComponent Mixin: -1

Depending on the internal implementation of an object makes your code brittle. Depending on the internal implementation of a Component makes your code brittle. @EmbeddedMixin is on par with using reflection to grab out private fields. Minor changes to that class/component and your code may not wor

Re: EmbeddedComponent Mixin: -1

Hi, On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 8:13 PM, Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo < thiag...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, 25 Aug 2011 14:36:26 -0300, Kalle Korhonen < > kalle.o.korho...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 8:40 AM, Taha Hafeez >> wrote: >> >>> I had a look at the code. It may not be th

Re: EmbeddedComponent Mixin: -1

On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 5:40 PM, Taha Hafeez wrote: > Hi Dragan! > > I had a look at the code. It may not be the best of designs but it > certainly is a good resource to learn about the internals of tapestry. > Would love you see a blog post about its implementation !! > Hey thanks. I've thinking

Re: EmbeddedComponent Mixin: -1

On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 11:13 AM, Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo wrote: > On Thu, 25 Aug 2011 14:36:26 -0300, Kalle Korhonen > wrote: >> On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 8:40 AM, Taha Hafeez >> wrote: >>> I had a look at the code. It may not be the best of designs but it >>> certainly is a good resource t

Re: EmbeddedComponent Mixin: -1

On Thu, 25 Aug 2011 14:36:26 -0300, Kalle Korhonen wrote: On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 8:40 AM, Taha Hafeez wrote: I had a look at the code. It may not be the best of designs but it certainly is a good resource to learn about the internals of tapestry. Would love you see a blog post about its i

Re: EmbeddedComponent Mixin: -1

On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 8:40 AM, Taha Hafeez wrote: > I had a look at the code. It may not be the best of designs but it > certainly is a good resource to learn about the internals of tapestry. > Would love you see a blog post about its implementation !! So far, nobody has stepped up to propose a

Re: EmbeddedComponent Mixin: -1

Hi Dragan! I had a look at the code. It may not be the best of designs but it certainly is a good resource to learn about the internals of tapestry. Would love you see a blog post about its implementation !! On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 11:48 PM, dragan.sahpas...@gmail.com wrote: > On Mon, Aug 15, 20

Re: EmbeddedComponent Mixin: -1

On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 8:13 PM, Howard Lewis Ship wrote: > I've just backed out commit d8bf4fe19331faa3eaddc4a3f6a9d48827a7a590 > which added the EmbeddedMixin annotation & support. > > Sorry, Dragan! > Nothing to be sorry about. I got pretty useful comments. Cheers, Dragan Sahpaski > > On Mo

Re: EmbeddedComponent Mixin: -1

On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 6:59 PM, Howard Lewis Ship wrote: > Actually, I'd rather ensure that it's easier to re-use the Grid > component's constituent parts in new forms than to try and make Grid > all things to all people. Grid is (supposed to be) scaffolding, like > BeanEditForm, but too often,

Re: EmbeddedComponent Mixin: -1

I've just backed out commit d8bf4fe19331faa3eaddc4a3f6a9d48827a7a590 which added the EmbeddedMixin annotation & support. Sorry, Dragan! On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 11:06 AM, dragan.sahpas...@gmail.com wrote: > Hi, > On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 2:11 PM, Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo < > thiag...@gmail.co

Re: EmbeddedComponent Mixin: -1

Hi, On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 2:11 PM, Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo < thiag...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, 13 Aug 2011 01:39:36 -0300, Robert Zeigler < > robert.zeig...@roxanemy.com> wrote: > > I disagree with your assessment of mixins. Mixins are primarily tied to >> the component lifecycle, not

Re: EmbeddedComponent Mixin: -1

Actually, I'd rather ensure that it's easier to re-use the Grid component's constituent parts in new forms than to try and make Grid all things to all people. Grid is (supposed to be) scaffolding, like BeanEditForm, but too often, people make it a major part of the application, and then are disapp

Re: EmbeddedComponent Mixin: -1

It would be better to have core components more flexible to external changes. I'm looking into ContextMenuGridCell and I would rather see extended PropertyOverrides and extension points concept. For example a Grid would provide default extending point for a row: > ..< then PropertyOverrides c

Re: EmbeddedComponent Mixin: -1

On Sat, 13 Aug 2011 01:39:36 -0300, Robert Zeigler wrote: I disagree with your assessment of mixins. Mixins are primarily tied to the component lifecycle, not to specific component implementations. There are certainly some mixins that can't be universally applied (eg: they may assume t

Re: EmbeddedComponent Mixin: -1

Continuing the JIRA discussion here: So I'm -1 on this change. I wouldn't be happy with Java code that downcast from an interface to an implementation class and then used reflection to modify its fields ... that's pretty much what we have here. Yes the casting can be solved, but I didn't exactly

Re: EmbeddedComponent Mixin: -1

On Sat, Aug 13, 2011 at 12:45 AM, Howard Lewis Ship wrote: > See notes here: > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAP5-1606?focusedCommentId=13084434#comment-13084434 > > I'm -1 on this change. It goes against an important part of the > Tapestry design: that embedded components are part of

Re: EmbeddedComponent Mixin: -1

I disagree with your assessment of mixins. Mixins are primarily tied to the component lifecycle, not to specific component implementations. There are certainly some mixins that can't be universally applied (eg: they may assume that the component is a ClientElement which may or may not be true)

Re: EmbeddedComponent Mixin: -1

Well, you can have the same view on all mixins, that they are hacks to get around design issues with components. Any mixin may break if you change the internal implementation of a component it's applied to. Anyway wish you guys had voiced your opinions earlier when Dragan was begging for comments.

Re: EmbeddedComponent Mixin: -1

I'm also -1. It definitely seems like a hack to get around a design issue with a component. On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 3:45 PM, Howard Lewis Ship wrote: > See notes here: > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAP5-1606?focusedCommentId=13084434#comment-13084434 > > I'm -1 on this change. It goes

Re: EmbeddedComponent Mixin: -1

I see the patch has been applied. No tests. I may back it out. I'll let it stew over the weekend. On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 3:45 PM, Howard Lewis Ship wrote: > See notes here: > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAP5-1606?focusedCommentId=13084434#comment-13084434 > > I'm -1 on this change.

EmbeddedComponent Mixin: -1

See notes here: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAP5-1606?focusedCommentId=13084434#comment-13084434 I'm -1 on this change. It goes against an important part of the Tapestry design: that embedded components are part of a components internal structure and not exposed to the outside world as