On 28/02/2008, at 9:04 AM, Mike Schrag wrote:
>>> I'm not sure how they determine which ones are actions compared
>>> to just regular "get" methods. No way they looked at the
>>> inheritance hierarchy to only show methods that extend from
>>> WOActionResults (and even though we can do that easily, it's
>>> really expensive to actually do that).
>>
>> I'd be guessing they did.
> Should be relatively straightforward to test ... Subclass
> WOComponent as CommonComponent (but don't make a .wo), and have an
> action method that declares its type signature as returning
> CommonComponent. There's no .wo to match it against, so WO would
> have to walk the inheritance tree to know that's a
> WOActionResults. It's mostly academic, but I am a little curious.
> If anyone has a WOB around and wants to try this to see, I'd be
> interested to know the results.
Just did this.
- created new WebObjects application within Xcode (I'd forgotten how
quickly you can type in Cocoa apps)
- Added new Java Class: CommonComponent extends WOComponent
- Added method to Main.java: public CommonComponent someResults()
{ return null; }
- Double clicked on Main.wo
WOB shows the someResults action below the line.
- Changed Main to subclass CommonComponent
- moved method to super class but as returning yet again another
component name (without *.wo)
Also is showed.
It depends if there are no potential compile errors... but it works
(mostly) :-)
with regards,
--Lachlan Deck
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Wed Feb 27 2008 - 17:36:44 EST