You're right. My point was only that it's not completely unnecessary to reset state.
El Lun, 18-07-2005 a las 00:32 -0700, Patrick Casey escribió: > Couldn't you reset property state in the PageDetatchListener? I'm > with you in not using abstract properties either, but I think this is a case > where Howard changed the way we have to accomplish something rather than > made it impossible. > > --- Pat > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Pedro Abelleira Seco [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Monday, July 18, 2005 12:23 AM > > To: Howard Lewis Ship > > Cc: Tapestry users > > Subject: Re: Some Tapestry 4 questions > > > > Related to this I making my pages inherit from a common base class with > > some properties. As I don't want to copy and paste lots of > > property-specification's in each of my .page files I use concrete > > properties and care to reset them. > > > > The bottom line is that I don't think that abstract properties make > > unnecessary to reset state, unless there is another way of doing what I > > trying to do. > > > > Regards > > > > > > > initialize() dates back to 2.x, and was a hook to reset state. > > > Abstract properties in 3.0 made this unncessary. In addition, there > > > are listener interfaces (PageAttachListener and PageDetachListener) to > > > support this behavior much more nicely. > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
