Hi Lance, I am resistant to passing these parameters in the t:context to my event handlers because:
1) it is boilerplate stuff and Tapestry is supposed to handle that without me writing code 2) it clutters my event handlers contract with fields and functions the method is not directly concerned with - this breaks OO seperation of concerns, my event handler will have to concern with persistence 3) if I attempt to avoid cluttering my code to implement persistence as above by using client side properties my code is then cluttered with duplicate member definitions and code to set these duplicates up 4) @Persists(PersistConstants.CLIENT) produces some nasty URLs and burdens the network with excess bytes Whatever of these approach I take is not OO or DRY and do not seem to follow the Tapestry ethos of eliminating boilerplate coding. I hope that doesn't seem like a criticism of you and your helpful replies, thank you Lance. I will certainly be changing my code to using eventlink and it seems I am burdened with swallowing these parameters by passing them through t:context! John ----- Original Message ----- From: Lance Java To: Tapestry users Sent: Friday, December 06, 2013 8:36 AM Subject: Re: component paramter frustrations I've said this many times now. You must pass the parameters in the event context. <t:actionlink t:id="foo" context="[param1,param2,param3]"... /> onActionFromFoo(String param1, Foo param2, Bar param3) BTW: IMHO actionlink is deprecated and shouldn't be used. Use eventlink instead.
