This Bugzilla instance is a read-only archive of historic NetBeans bug reports. To report a bug in NetBeans please follow the project's instructions for reporting issues.

Bug 35461 - Registry ignores ordering attributes
Summary: Registry ignores ordering attributes
Status: VERIFIED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: platform
Classification: Unclassified
Component: -- Other -- (show other bugs)
Version: 3.x
Hardware: PC All
: P1 blocker (vote)
Assignee: David Konecny
URL:
Keywords:
: 35451 (view as bug list)
Depends on:
Blocks: 35438
  Show dependency tree
 
Reported: 2003-08-18 09:38 UTC by Vitezslav Stejskal
Modified: 2008-12-22 19:30 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:
Issue Type: DEFECT
Exception Reporter:

Attachments
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Vitezslav Stejskal 2003-08-18 09:38:18 UTC 
When trying to order bindings in the context using
<attr name="binding-1/binding-2"
boolvalue="true"/> file attribute set on
contenxt's folder nothing happens. The Registry
API seems to ignore these attributes and orders
bindings on its own. This is critical since many
registrations done in modules layers (e.g.
registered looks, actions, etc) rely on the
possibility to define ordering.
Comment 1 David Konecny 2003-08-18 14:26:43 UTC 
Context.getOrderedNames() and Context.getOrderedObjects() now works fine.

Fixed in:
Checking in src/org/netbeans/core/registry/ContextImpl.java;
new revision: 1.10; previous revision: 1.9
Checking in
test/unit/src/org/netbeans/api/registry/fs/FileSystemContextFactoryTest.java;
new revision: 1.2; previous revision: 1.1
Checking in test/unit/src/org/netbeans/api/registry/fs/OrderingTest.java;
initial revision: 1.1
Checking in test/unit/src/org/netbeans/api/registry/fs/data/layer1.xml;
initial revision: 1.1
Checking in test/unit/src/org/netbeans/api/registry/fs/data/layer2.xml;
initial revision: 1.1
Comment 2 David Konecny 2003-08-19 09:07:16 UTC 
*** Issue 35451 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. ***
Comment 3 Lukas Hasik 2004-02-24 11:09:56 UTC 
x