DO NOT REPLY [Bug 28381] New: - support for subclassing in DirectService

[bu...@apache.org]

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG 
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
<http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28381>.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND 
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28381

support for subclassing in DirectService

           Summary: support for subclassing in DirectService
           Product: Tapestry
           Version: 3.0
          Platform: Other
        OS/Version: Other
            Status: NEW
          Severity: Enhancement
          Priority: Other
         Component: Framework
        AssignedTo: tapestry-dev@jakarta.apache.org
        ReportedBy: programozas@hotmail.com


I'd like to subclass DirectService by slightly modifying the behaviour of the 
service() method but leaving the getLink() method untouched. I have the 
following problems with this:
- DirectService.STATEFUL_ON and DirectService.STATEFUL_OFF are private, so I 
cannot copy-paste the code from the original service() method to my subclass
- Of course it would be much better to prevent copy-paste. For example the 
service() method should be cut into at least two separate methods: extracting 
parameters and executing service related tasks. This is necessary to execute 
the service without a RequestContext (for testing or internal invocation).
- the above subclassing problem is true for all services

All the above is irrelevant if default Tapestry services are not intended to be 
(easily) subclassed (but I think they should be).

Thanks,
Norbi

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org