True, components render in order and they take parameters ... great idea,
actually :) thanks!
-Original Message-
From: Howard Lewis Ship [mailto:hls...@gmail.com]
Sent: Samstag, 22. Oktober 2011 21:54
To: Tapestry users
Subject: Re: ComponentResources.getInformalParameterNames()
Or it
Or it could be that you are misusing blocks, which are designed to
have truly simple semantics, when you could be using nested components
instead, so you could have the semantics you desire.
On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 11:17 AM, Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo
wrote:
> On Sat, 22 Oct 2011 15:38:17 -020
On Sat, 22 Oct 2011 15:38:17 -0200, Wechsung, Wulf
wrote:
Besides the issue of what the spec really means by "not significant" (I
strongly suspect it means for validity only), I really don't understand
what's behind that statement. I mean, every XML parser simply parses
text.
But attri
Message-
> From: Steve Eynon [mailto:steve.ey...@alienfactory.co.uk]
> Sent: Samstag, 22. Oktober 2011 15:33
> To: Tapestry users
> Subject: Re: ComponentResources.getInformalParameterNames()
>
> Hiya,
>
>> Bearing in mind XML doesn't enforce ordering on attri
rant out :)
Best Regards,
Wulf
-Original Message-
From: Steve Eynon [mailto:steve.ey...@alienfactory.co.uk]
Sent: Samstag, 22. Oktober 2011 15:33
To: Tapestry users
Subject: Re: ComponentResources.getInformalParameterNames()
Hiya,
> Bearing in mind XML doesn't enforce ordering o
ds,
Wulf
-Original Message-
From: Robert Zeigler [mailto:robert.zeig...@roxanemy.com]
Sent: Samstag, 22. Oktober 2011 19:07
To: Tapestry users
Subject: Re: ComponentResources.getInformalParameterNames()
On Oct 22, 2011, at 10/227:59 AM , Wechsung, Wulf wrote:
> Hi Robert,
>
&g
On Oct 22, 2011, at 10/227:59 AM , Wechsung, Wulf wrote:
> Hi Robert,
>
> thanks for your response!
>
> I see. I understand that the attribute order (even element order ...) in the
> document is supposed to be insignificant but does that really mean that the
> information about the attribute
get hit with all the ugly at once ;)
>
> Best Regards,
> Wulf
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-
> From: Robert Zeigler [mailto:robert.zeig...@roxanemy.com]
> Sent: Samstag, 22. Oktober 2011 14:26
> To: Tapestry users
> Subject: Re: ComponentResources.getInformalParameterNames()
&
n such a
way that you get hit with all the ugly at once ;)
Best Regards,
Wulf
-Original Message-
From: Robert Zeigler [mailto:robert.zeig...@roxanemy.com]
Sent: Samstag, 22. Oktober 2011 14:26
To: Tapestry users
Subject: Re: ComponentResources.getInformalParameterNames()
Block p
s truly an
> exceptional circumstance or not. Also, I always include a check method if I
> am going to throw or return null -> hasXYZ()? getXYZ().toString() : "no
> xyz".
>
> Best Regards,
> Wulf
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Steve Eynon [
ng() : "no xyz".
Best Regards,
Wulf
-Original Message-
From: Steve Eynon [mailto:steve.ey...@alienfactory.co.uk]
Sent: Samstag, 22. Oktober 2011 06:15
To: Tapestry users
Subject: Re: ComponentResources.getInformalParameterNames()
Looking at the code, yes, the names are indeed sorted.
Looking at the code, yes, the names are indeed sorted. But even if
they weren't I doubt they'd be returned in the template defined order
as internally they are stored as set of bindings and transformed into
a named map - and both structures are notorious for losing a defined
order.
Turning the que
12 matches
Mail list logo
