Me neither. I was asking for this feature because tapestry is extensible in so may aspects that maybe, it could have been for configuration type.
Le mar. 5 mai 2015 à 12:44, Lance Java <lance.j...@googlemail.com> a écrit : > I'm not convinced that this should be a core concept as it's likely to be > different case by case. The TypeCoercer and it's CoercionTuple are another > example of a tree like structure being built by an UnorderedConfiguration. > > https://tapestry.apache.org/type-coercion.html > On 4 May 2015 13:14, "Charlouze" <m...@charlouze.com> wrote: > > > Thanks for your input Lance, you pictured what i had in mind when i was > > talking about the workaround. > > > > But i want to know if adding a configuration type is something that is > > doable ? > > > > Le lun. 4 mai 2015 à 13:51, Lance Java <lance.j...@googlemail.com> a > > écrit : > > > > > You could probably achieve this with an > OrderedConfiguration<NodeConfig> > > > > > > Eg: > > > > > > public interface NodeConfig() { > > > public String getName(); > > > public String getParentName(); //optional > > > public List<String> getChildNames(); // optional > > > } > > > > > > After all contributions, you could build a tree of nodes by calculating > > > actual children combining getParentName() with getChildNames() where > > > appropriate. You could contribute multiple times to the same Node. > > > > > >
