Re: Split package caused by DisableStrictChecks

On Thu, May 19, 2022 at 4:33 AM Ben Weidig <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi,

Hi!

> > It won't be backward compatible, but on the other hand it's just one
> annotation,
> > it's very new and I suppose there aren't many people using it,
> > if any (except my day job, which uses it in a handful of places).
>
> I'm using it, too!
> It really helps replacing some older stuff that needs to be extended
> without breaking everything else.

Oh, nice!

> But how do you deal with @InjectComponent in base classes?
> Maybe a boolean "allowMissing() default false" could be added to
> @InjectComponent,

I really like this idea.

> or @DisableStrictChecks could also target fields.

Hmm, I'm not sure I like this one. I really prefer adding something to
@InjectComponent like you suggested.

> I digress, that's another discussion.
>
> Moving just @DisableStrictChecks annotation to
> org.apache.tapestry5.*core*.annotations would still split the annotations

Well, it would in the sense of not having all annotations in a single
package, but we already don't have that, so I think this wouldn't be a
problem. Also, it's not a split in the Java module split package
sense, since it wouldn't be a package that appears in more than one
JAR.

> because all other core annotations are in org.apache.tapestry5.annotations.

Oh, I should have thought of this before: since @DisableStrictChecks
is in org.apache.tapestry5.annotations, but in tapestry-core, we can
just move it to the same package in tapestry5-annotations. No
backward-incompatible changes. Win-win! Other tapestry-core
annotations like @InjectComponents are already there, so there's no
need to create a org.apache.tapestry5.*core*.annotations package.

Cheers!

-- 
Thiago