Absolutely; if you look at the documentation for DirectLink, Form, etc., 
you'll see that the listener parameter is of type IActionListener.

If you go way back in time on Tapestry, you had to create synthetic 
properties that returned inner classes that implemented the interface.

Listener methods are a short cut for getting the same functionality. Less is 
more. However, I've always expected people to leverage the <bean> element to 
provide "off the shelf" listeners. Or, we may start seeing this with 
HiveMind.

On 4/18/05, Robert Zeigler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> > I'm just a user, but in my use of Tapestry so far, I've always preferred 
> to
> > think of a listener as a method and not an object... I find it easier 
> that
> > way. I like to ignore the fact that Tapestry automatically creates 
> hidden
> > objects for me. Of course, someday I might want that feature, but I 
> don't
> > think this enhancement would get in the way.
> >
> > -Nathan
> 
> This /is/ an interesting question...
> I'm curious, Howard, because I have made some use of the fact that
> listeners are objects... I assume this is still kosher with the new 
> changes?
> 
> Robert
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 


-- 
Howard M. Lewis Ship
Independent J2EE / Open-Source Java Consultant
Creator, Jakarta Tapestry
Creator, Jakarta HiveMind

Professional Tapestry training, mentoring, support
and project work. http://howardlewisship.com

Reply via email to