[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAPESTRY-755?page=comments#action_12357812 ]
Howard M. Lewis Ship commented on TAPESTRY-755: ----------------------------------------------- I'll be somewhat surprised if this is the case, especially for a Sun JDK. I'll be building a test case in my sandbox shortly. Are you absolutely sure about the property names, method names, and that everything is public and abstract? > injection: Beware of where you declare the abstract method > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: TAPESTRY-755 > URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAPESTRY-755 > Project: Tapestry > Type: Bug > Components: Framework > Versions: 4.0 > Environment: Tested on Tomcat 5.5.9 / JDK 1.5 / FC2 > Reporter: Henrik Vendelbo > Priority: Minor > > Take the following class hierachy: BasePage -> MarketPage -> FeaturePage > If you inject into FeaturePage using an <inject> tag in the page file, but > the abstract method is declared in MarketPage, the enhanced version of > FeaturePage will _not_ have an implementation of the accessor method. > If you try to declare the abstract method in FeaturePage as well, it will > _not_ have an implementation of the accessor method. > If you instead do an @InjectObject in MarketPage(and remember to remove the > inject tag), the enhanced FeaturePage class will have an implementation of > the accessor method. > I other words the current functionality requires that you inject into the > class that first declares the abstract method, and not a sub class. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa - For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
