On Thu, 06 Feb 2014 18:57:24 -0200, iberck <[email protected]> wrote:
Thank you for your answer Thiago.
;)
I have to create multiple c1,c2,c3,c4,c5,c6,c7,c8,c9 child components of
parentcomponent so I prefer to put the logic inside each component and
then decide which component use with a separate component:
I have no idea what scenario you're describing now I understand what you
wrote, to be sincere. And I guess it's not much related to the scenario in
the original post of this thread.
ComponentCase.tml:
<t:delegate to="block"/>
<t:block id="c1">
<t:c1 param1="${param1}" param2="${param2}" param3="${param3}"/>
</t:block>
For the love of everything which is sacred for you, never, never, ever use
${} expansions when passing parameters*. In 100% of the cases, it's
useless (when the parameter type value is a string) or completely wrong
and causes an error (when it isn't).
[*]: According to
http://apache-tapestry-mailing-list-archives.1045711.n5.nabble.com/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=search_page&node=2375124&query=never%2C+never+ever+expansion&n=2375124,
I've said this 47 times already. It seems it wasn't enough, so the 48th is
in this message! :D
What kind of design is better implemented in this case?
It depends on the case. This thread described just very vague scenarios. I
don't even know why would you need so many component subclasses (the c1,
c2, cn you described above). You either have a very weird requirement or a
very bad way of doing code reuse.
--
Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo
Tapestry, Java and Hibernate consultant and developer
http://machina.com.br
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
