Am 22.02.2010 16:20, schrieb Piero Sartini:
Yeah, I understand the limitation. But how should I access a property which
is defined in my base class in one of the subclasses with these limitations?
Just don't use @Property - provide getXXX and setXXX methods.
As far as I understand, I cannot make my base classes property protected,
nor can I generate a public getter/Setter pair.
You can generate a public getter/setter pair - but you may not use
@Property then. If tapestry finds @Property, everything it does is
creating the getter/setter methods. But it fails to do so if they are
already present. Don't use @Property and it works like expected.
This sounds like reasonable and clean solution. I was thinking way to
complicated. I had thought that this @Property annotation is necessary
in order to persist a property with @Persist or for using it as a form
component's value property.
Thanks,
Andy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org
