Thanks!
Looks like nice way to satisfy my desires :)

--- Howard Lewis Ship <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> My approach has always been to start from a position
> of strength,
> which generally means lots of details, such as
> exactly what to inject.
>  It much easier to loosen things up gradually (by
> introducing smart
> defaults) if you start from a state where things are
> very explicitly
> defined.
> 
> In fact, you could code and prototype this yourself;
> the logic you
> want should be part of the EnhancementWorkers
> configuration point:
> 
>
http://jakarta.apache.org/tapestry/tapestry-annotations/hivedocs/config/tapestry.enhance.EnhancementWorkers.html
> 
> You would need to provide a worker that fits in just
> before
> abstract-property.  It could scan the unclaimed
> properties
> 
>
http://jakarta.apache.org/tapestry/tapestry/apidocs/org/apache/tapestry/enhance/EnhancementOperation.html#findUnclaimedAbstractProperties()
> 
> and determine which of them could be injected
> 
>
http://jakarta.apache.org/hivemind/hivemind/apidocs/org/apache/hivemind/internal/Module.html#getService(java.lang.Class)
> 
> (which, unfortunately, throws an exception if not
> found ... need to
> add a checkForService() method).
> 
> It's then pretty simple to inject the service
> implementation into the
> class and implement the read-only accessor method.
> 
>
http://jakarta.apache.org/tapestry/tapestry/apidocs/src-html/org/apache/tapestry/enhance/InjectObjectWorker.html#line.33
> 
> 
> On 10/12/05, Konstantin Ignatyev
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I buy into the consistency argument but still do
> not
> > want to see  annotations in the trivial cases.
> >
> > I am talking about consistency of different kind:
> tool
> > does everything for me till it needs guidance. It
> is
> > about Sensible defaults philosophy and following
> > conventions philosophy.
> > For example the now famous 'Ruby-on-Rails' is
> > entirely built of conventions and enjoys enormous
> > success (although at my taste RoR relies on
> > conventions too much).
> >
> >
> > --- Ivano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > I'm totally with Pat and Scott on this.
> > > For a tool to behave consistently is a critical
> > > point, and to do this
> > > you should avoid different behaviour without any
> > > apparent reason.
> > > In the long run the simple routine of performing
> > > those little but
> > > familiar steps will become automatical for you
> > > (believe me, it's true),
> > > while
> > > preserving consistency and clarity for the
> newbies.
> > >
> > > -1 for automagical annotations =)
> > >
> > > Ivano
> > >
> > > Patrick Casey wrote:
> > >
> > > >     I'm with Scott on this one. I think that
> less
> > > auto-magic, not more,
> > > >makes the framework infinitely simpler for new
> > > users to understand. One of
> > > >my long-term usability complaints about
> tapestry
> > > 3.0.3 has been the
> > > >inconstient use of the "ognl" prefix in an
> effort
> > > to save keystrokes because
> > > >tapestry should just "know" that I mean the
> > > litteral "foo" instead of the
> > > >derived value getFoo().
> > > >
> > > >     I'd hate to see the same confusion make
> its way
> > > into Tapestry 4.0 as
> > > >well. To my way of thinking the additional
> > > keystrokes required to annotate
> > > >everything the same way is more than offset by
> the
> > > shorter learning curve of
> > > >a system that has one, and only one, consistent
> way
> > > of injecting things into
> > > >pages.
> > > >
> > > >     --- Pat
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > For additional commands, e-mail:
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > Konstantin Ignatyev
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > PS: If this is a typical day on planet earth,
> humans will add fifteen million tons of carbon to
> the atmosphere, destroy 115 square miles of tropical
> rainforest, create seventy-two miles of desert,
> eliminate between forty to one hundred species,
> erode seventy-one million tons of topsoil, add 2,700
> tons of CFCs to the stratosphere, and increase their
> population by 263,000
> >
> > Bowers, C.A.  The Culture of Denial:  Why the
> Environmental Movement Needs a Strategy for
> Reforming Universities and Public Schools.  New
> York:  State University of New York Press, 1997: (4)
> (5) (p.206)
> >
> >
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 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
> 
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 


Konstantin Ignatyev




PS: If this is a typical day on planet earth, humans will add fifteen million 
tons of carbon to the atmosphere, destroy 115 square miles of tropical 
rainforest, create seventy-two miles of desert, eliminate between forty to one 
hundred species, erode seventy-one million tons of topsoil, add 2,700 tons of 
CFCs to the stratosphere, and increase their population by 263,000

Bowers, C.A.  The Culture of Denial:  Why the Environmental Movement Needs a 
Strategy for Reforming Universities and Public Schools.  New York:  State 
University of New York Press, 1997: (4) (5) (p.206)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to