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 question on it's head, why would you need the order of
informal parameters anyway? Bearing in mind XML doesn't enforce
ordering on attributes.

Steve.


On 22 October 2011 07:00, Wechsung, Wulf <wulf.wechs...@sap.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I just noticed the API Doc for ComponentResources.getInformalParameterNames() 
> says that it returns the parameter names in alphabetical order. I'm stunned, 
> to be honest because I would not have expected this at all and I really need 
> them to be in the order as defined in the template ... is there any 
> particular reason the framework decides to destroy otherwise inaccessible (?) 
> information by doing a sort ( which would be like a single line if someone 
> really needed it that way ..) before returning this?
>
> Thanks and kind Regards,
> Wulf
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org

Reply via email to