> Any comments why this is not available by default or did I missed the point here and its already in place? <
Done so. Anyway It is setting a SerializationProvider static property at startup. Since I see that the use is only to provide a Token it just makes me think that there is a limitation to one instance only. Anyway. Thanks for the reply. I will try to start up two instances of it and check if it works out. The object locator would be enough. Where is it added as a service? I just don't saw the registry object becoming available. 2013/10/19 Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo <thiag...@gmail.com> > It is, not as the Registry service, but as the ObjectLocator service > (Registry extends ObjectLocator and ObjectLocator is the one that declares > the getService(), getObject() and autobuild() methods). > > Tapestry-IoC does *not* impose one Registry per JVM. Same for > Tapestry(-core). You can create as many Registry instances you want using > RegistryBuilder. Tapestry(-core) automatically creates one Registry per web > application, but you can create as many as you want using RegistryBuilder. > For more information, read > http://tapestry.apache.org/starting-the-ioc-registry.html. > > By the way, it would be nice to ask how to do something instead of why x > doesn't exist, because sometimes it does exist, as that's the case with > both statements in the original message in the thread. > > > > On Sat, Oct 19, 2013 at 6:21 AM, Martin Kersten < > martin.kersten...@gmail.com > > wrote: > > > Hi there, > > > > I just wonder why the registry is not available as a service. > > > > Doing all those test writing I got used to handle the Registry directly. > > Since the Registry represents the IOC for me, I just wonder why it is > ment > > to that the registry can not directly be injected (or do I miss something > > here). > > > > The only reference I found was that the Registry adds itself to the > > SerializationSupport. Which by checking the references looks like a > relict > > and should be removed from the code. It looks like that tapestry tries to > > impose a single tapestry instance per JVM which seams to me like a design > > flaw. (If you collect things to change for Tapestry 6 maybe one should > add > > that multiple instances of tapestry should be possible per JVM so no more > > use of static references). > > > > So unitl I missed something, I just wonder why I can not do something > like: > > > > ServiceImpl(Registry){...} > > > > I can provide it easily by doing something like: > > > > binder.bind(RegisteryReference.class); > > > > --- > > registery.getService(RegisteryReference).setRegistery(registry); > > > > And then I inject the reference in my services. The reference uses a weak > > link to ease gc on shutdown. > > > > (Or I just bind a registry wrapper that delegates the registry > interaction > > towards the real registry once it is created). > > > > Any comments why this is not available by default or did I missed the > point > > here and its already in place? > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > Martin (Kersten), > > Germany > > > > > > -- > Thiago >
