The IRequestCycle instance is used very often, for common tasks. For example:
extracting DirectLink's parameters, getting or activating another page, getting
the container Form, etc.
So I think it was a logical desing decision to make it available as a
parameter, because most listeners use it.
As I wrote 4.0 does not require IRequestCycle as parameter, but in most cases I
include it in the parameter list instead of calling getPage().getRequestCycle().
It simply saves some coding and makes the method more readable.
Br,
Norbi
----- Original Message -----
From: Pablo Ruggia
To: Norbert S�ndor
Cc: Tapestry users
Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2005 1:07 AM
Subject: Re: IRequestCycle
Yes, it's a constraint, but why is the reason ?
On 6/15/05, Norbert S�ndor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
In Tapestry 3.0 it is a constraint on the listener methods' signature.
In Tapestry 4.0 there is no such constraint, see
http://jakarta.apache.org/tapestry/current/UsersGuide/listenermethods.html.
Br,
Norbi
----- Original Message -----
From: "Pablo Ruggia" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Tapestry users" <[email protected] >
Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2005 9:58 PM
Subject: IRequestCycle
What is the difference between the IRequestCycle passed as parameter to a
listener method and the one obtained by page's getRequestCycle() method ?
And if they are equals, why my listeners have to have this parameter.
