adding the @Primary was definitely an option, but like I was arguing
above, why force everyone that wants the main result processor to add
@Primary @Traditional, when they could just ask CERP to be injected, and
voila..
just thought it was weird that you created CIRP, then added it as
@ComponentInstanceProcessor CERP. So you wiped out the information of
what it was (by binding it as a normal CERP), but then was forced to add
back the information of the implementation (via the special marker).
but anyhow. thank you for so much hard work and support you give us!!! :)
On 1/15/09 9:32 AM, Howard M. Lewis Ship (JIRA) wrote:
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAP5-443?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12664185#action_12664185
]
Howard M. Lewis Ship commented on TAP5-443:
-------------------------------------------
What was really needed was a @Primary annotation to distinguish the pipeline
from the services contributed into the pipeline.
There are two services that implement ComponentEventResultProcessor, and
declare the @Traditional marker
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Key: TAP5-443
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAP5-443
Project: Tapestry 5
Issue Type: Bug
Components: tapestry-core
Affects Versions: 5.1.0.0
Reporter: Fernando
Assignee: Howard M. Lewis Ship
Priority: Blocker
This causes a bad exception when tapestry tries to resolve an IoC dependency
asking for @Traditional ComponentEventResultProcessor...
I think you just want to remove it from ComponentInstanceResultProcessor.java,
and remove it from TapestryModule.java:1346 (where it uses the secondary
marker, @ComponentInstanceProcessor ).
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
