I agree that tapestry could be nice and at the least should log a warning to the console in this case.
As you said, throwing an exception would be good too... at least in development mode. Not sure but perhaps it should throw exceptions if some (configurable) symbol is set to "true". I think this is worthy of a Jira issue. On Tuesday, 6 March 2012, Jochen Berger <foober...@googlemail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > Am 05.03.2012 11:41, schrieb Lance Java: >> >> The javascript stack concept exists so that the stack remains constant and >> can be cached by the client's browser. >> >> You are now asking to break this contract and have stacks be dynamic based >> on what components are on a page which would eliminate the ability to cache >> them in the client's browser. > > Right, I missed that ignoring duplicates would break the stack assembling feature. But I still see problems with the current behavior. I think we should find a way to prevent someone from creating stack setups like mine (a single asset being used in multiple stacks). Maybe JavaScriptStackSource(Impl) could log a warning or even throw an exception if that is done. What do you think? > > Jochen > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org > >
