Ok I found out what happends. The class is a private static class and so the default constructor is private too. Boomer. You can still pass the class along and issue newInstance on it. What a funny thing. So I just check for it and do the newInstance myself and do field injection myself. If I add a public empty constructor tapestry just does it. But I have the inject field dependencies stuff already done (was a almost no brainer so its ok.).
2013/9/24 Martin Kersten <martin.kersten...@gmail.com> > Well its a bug. I dont habe any constructor at all. Calm down and relax. > You dont need ans. Just call Class.newInstance and you are fine. That is > pro.level OOP. :-) > Am 24.09.2013 14:34 schrieb "Thiago H de Paula Figueiredo" < > thiag...@gmail.com>: > > On Tue, 24 Sep 2013 08:57:41 -0300, Martin Kersten < >> martin.kersten...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Also the IOC needs a public constructor for autobuild. Fine I dont have >>> any... . Would have been a bug report. But I wont mind... . >>> >> >> That's not a bug, that OOP and Java working as they should. How could any >> code instantiate a class without a public constructor? That would be a >> violation of access constraints, and the JVM checks for that. >> >> -- >> Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo >> >> ------------------------------**------------------------------**--------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: >> users-unsubscribe@tapestry.**apache.org<users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org> >> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org >> >>
