Thanks, good to know.
However, I am pretty sure that it's just bad practive to pass a page around.
In my case, all I wanted was a service that could control the workflow...
and the pageName is all it needs for that.
2012/2/24 Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo <thiag...@gmail.com>
> On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 08:23:47 -0200, Beat Durrer <bdur...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hey guys
>>
>
> Hi!
>
>
> I just spent a whole day on a issue, where a service call in a page class
>> ended in a "java.lang.LinkageError: loader constraint violation the class
>> loader {...} of the current class, MyPage, and the class loader {...} for
>> resolved class, MyService, have different Class objects for the type used
>> in the signature"
>>
>> What I did was totally stupid (at least in hindsight): I accidentally
>> passed the page object to the service:
>>
>> MyPage{
>> Object onSuccess(){
>> return myService.doStuff(this);
>> }
>> }
>>
>> It's no suprise that that wouldn't work when accustomed to J2EE and
>> remote stuff, althrough I didn't expect that to happen in T5.3.
>>
>
> This is a side-effect of having the page, component and mixins classes
> loaded by a different classloader inside Tapestry. So you have the normal
> classloader, which has the non-transformed version of the controlled
> classes, and the Tapestry one, which has the transformed versions. The
> Class instances for them are different. If you create an interface,
> implement it in your class and make the service receive this interface
> instead of the page type, I guess it would solve the problem.
>
> --
> Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo
> Independent Java, Apache Tapestry 5 and Hibernate consultant, developer,
> and instructor
> Owner, Ars Machina Tecnologia da Informação Ltda.
> http://www.arsmachina.com.br
>
