[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAP5-1955?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Bob Harner resolved TAP5-1955.
------------------------------
Resolution: Invalid
This bug seems to be confusing the 1-parameter bind method with the 2-parameter
bind method. I think the docs are correct in describing the limitations of the
1-parameter bind method, but if anyone disagrees, feel free to reopen.
> Documentation on ServiceBinder#bind(Class<T> implementationClass) is
> wrong/lacks extra information
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: TAP5-1955
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAP5-1955
> Project: Tapestry 5
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: tapestry-core
> Affects Versions: 5.3.3
> Reporter: Carsten Klein
> Priority: Minor
> Labels: bulk-close-candidate
>
> The documentation on the above mentioned method states that
> > Defines a service in terms of an implementation class, without a service
> > interface. In this case, the service
> > will not be proxiable (proxying requires a service interface) and {@link
> > ServiceDef#getServiceInterface()} will
> > return the implementation class. In this situation, the service will not be
> > proxied; it will be instantiated
> > fully on first reference (ignoring its scope, if any) and will not be
> > decorated.
> In tapestry-core InternalModule I found usages of that interface, where you
> bind an interface class.
> Looking at the code, the implementation will try to resolve the
> implementation class and then bind
> it using the standard bind(Class<T> serviceInterface, Class<? extends T>
> implementationClass) method.
> Bound as such, the interface can both be proxied and decorated.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
