-
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>
>
>
> --------
> If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the
> discussion below:
> ht
On Wed, 05 Oct 2011 19:00:05 -0300, okramlee wrote:
Hi Thiago,
Hi!
" If a field isn't @SessionState, it is completely thread-safe, not
being shared between users."
Yeah, that was what I thought about. But it did share the object between
users even though I remove everything and keep sale
; don't know if there another way (or easier way) other than setting salesItem
> to be SessionState.
>
> Thanks again!
>
> Leo
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://tapestry.1045711.n5.nabble.com/SessionState-problem-tp4873622p487
f there another way (or easier way) other than setting salesItem
to be SessionState.
Thanks again!
Leo
--
View this message in context:
http://tapestry.1045711.n5.nabble.com/SessionState-problem-tp4873622p4874282.html
Sent from the Tapestry - User mailing list archiv
On Wed, 05 Oct 2011 17:56:44 -0300, leothelion
wrote:
If I erase the ' row="salesItem" ', then the adding problem is gone. But
I cannot use a SessionState instance as a row in grid component?
Yeah, but it's not a good idea, as you're using the same field for two
very different things (us
ent? If not, what
is the alternative way to do so?
Anyone got any idea?
--
View this message in context:
http://tapestry.1045711.n5.nabble.com/SessionState-problem-tp4873622p4874198.html
Sent from the Tapestry - User mailing list a
differed
by class, but in my case should I be OK?
Does anyone knows what I am missing in using SesstionState?
Regards,
Leo
--
View this message in context:
http://tapestry.1045711.n5.nabble.com/SessionState-problem-tp4873622p4873622.html
Sent from the Tapestry - User mailing list archive at
