Just in general, explicit order of listeners would destroy (current or future) possibilities for implicit parallelism. Problems with listener ordering can be solved with event propagation (by creating a nested element).
Kalle On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 12:27 AM, LiborGMC <l.pre...@gmc.net> wrote: > > Hi, thanks for responses. I'm using 5.1.0.5. Version 5.2 brings me more pain > than gain ;-). > I think my problem could be somewhere else: both my mixins wired event > handlers to same event "onclick". I don't know JS very well but could be > possible that JS don't keep ordering when notify listeners for particular > event. I think in Java (Swing) is the same situation. > So mixins are processed in correct order but listeners are not probably > notified in the same order in JS. Would you agree? > -- > View this message in context: > http://old.nabble.com/Order-of-processing-of-mixins-tp27933566p27942359.html > Sent from the Tapestry - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org
