Now, this blog post (specially the rewind cycle description) is what the
user docs should look like. Great explanation of the rewind cycle,
Nathan! I think if you help Tapestry developers specify those current
capabilities you don't want to lose, there should be no problem (and we
can always remove the rewind cycle).
--
Ing. Leonardo Quijano Vincenzi
DTQ Software
Nathan Kopp wrote:
I've written a blog post on why I like Tapestry's poorly-named-yet-very-useful
"rewind cycle." Before we get out the torches and pitchforks and eradicate all
memories of the dreaded rewind cycle from Tapestry's code, let's have a look at
what it has to offer and maybe think about why it was created in the first
place. :-) That way we won't lose functionality when the replacement is
designed and built.
Here's the blog post:
http://nate-tech.blogspot.com/2006/01/why-tapestrys-crazy-rewind-is-good.html
To summarize (for those who's time is limited), I like how the rewind cycle
replays the page render for processing, because (among other things) it allows
components to be bound directly to loop variables, so I don't need to track a
loop index for my bindings. No other framework that I know of can do this in
such an elegant way as Tapestry.
BTW, I have really enjoyed working with Tapestry, especially Tap 4. This is
great stuff!
-Nathan Kopp
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
