On 7/1/05, Vadim Pesochinskiy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Yes, that helps. Thanks a lot. > > Bright idea, it would be interesting to try find bugs in code that does > not exist.
That code is generated by the framework, tested by thounthends of people. I don't think you'll gonna need to debug it. Also class enhacement helps a lot to reduce the repetitive code. I am wondering how far run-time byte code generation will go... > > Todd O'Bryan wrote: > > > Because if you implement the methods, you're responsible for > > initializing and otherwise dealing with the page properties. If you > > leave them abstract Tapestry takes care of all of that for you. You > > only have to even declare the abstract methods if you actually call > > them in your own Java code, and that's just to make the compiler > > happy. Any calls that Tapestry makes internally (to set or get > > properties from the page) happen automatically. > > > > It's a little confusing and indirect, but it really does make your > > life easier. > > > > HTH, > > Todd > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
