[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAP5-1565?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13057959#comment-13057959
 ] 

Robert Zeigler commented on TAP5-1565:
--------------------------------------

It probably has the potential to break some code where there are ordering 
constraints specified, but perhaps not enough to precisely lock down the 
ordering where it needs to be.  I know when upgrading an app from 5.0.x to 
5.1.x that I had some situations like that, where my original ordering 
constraints were suddenly insufficient (I think new services in Tapestry 
created new ambiguities in the ordering).  That said, even given the risk of 
breaking apps, I would take the implicit ordering over random ordering because 
it will mean greater ordering stability in the future.

> OrderedConfiguration should have methods to make it easy to add elements in 
> sequential order
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: TAP5-1565
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAP5-1565
>             Project: Tapestry 5
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: tapestry-ioc
>    Affects Versions: 5.3
>            Reporter: Howard M. Lewis Ship
>            Priority: Minor
>
> It is not uncommon to have a series of elements to add to an 
> OrderedConfiguration in a specific order; it would be nice if there was a way 
> to add sequential items without manually tracking each nodes name and adding 
> "after:" clauses.
> Example:
>   configuration.add("item1", new Item1());
>   configuration.addSequential("item2", new Item2());
>   configuration.addInstanceSequential("item3", Item3.class);
> This would simply add an "after:item1" ordering constraint for item2, and an 
> "after:item3" constraint for item3.
> It should be legal to add an item sequentially, even if there is no 
> previously added item (added in this contribution method, or elsewhere), in 
> which case, no ordering constraint it added.
> Would "next" and "nextInstance" be better than "addSequential" and 
> "addInstanceSequential"?  I'm open to other suggestions on the naming.

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

        

Reply via email to