| Summary: | Easier access of navigation arguments | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [RT] Riena | Reporter: | Stephan Mann <stephan.mann> | ||||
| Component: | navigation | Assignee: | Project Inbox <riena.core-inbox> | ||||
| Status: | NEW --- | QA Contact: | |||||
| Severity: | enhancement | ||||||
| Priority: | P3 | CC: | christian.campo | ||||
| Version: | 2.0.0 | ||||||
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||||||
| Hardware: | PC | ||||||
| OS: | Windows 7 | ||||||
| Whiteboard: | |||||||
| Attachments: |
|
||||||
|
Description
Stephan Mann
Created attachment 188680 [details]
convenience methods for navigation
how about a declarative approach ?
@RequiresNavigationParameter(type=Customer.class)
public void configureRidgets(Customer customer) {
}
The declarative approach would be preferable, but IMHO not at the cost of an impaired flexibility. So multiple annotations would be required to differentiate between required and optional navigation parameters. (In reply to comment #3) > The declarative approach would be preferable, but IMHO not at the cost of an > impaired flexibility. So multiple annotations would be required to > differentiate between required and optional navigation parameters. I totally agree. I was also thinking of multiple annotations. (just too lazy to actually write them down :-) ) |