why not just introduce that interface and the impl in component?
So why also alter abstract behavior? Because that would mean that
suddenly almost all the behaviors that are used are suddenly also
IComponentConfigurationBehavior
And 99.9% of them don't do anything.
On Sat, Feb 19, 2011 at 04:17,
So in theory a behavior implementing this could add additional
components to the page? Or is the hierarchy frozen at this point?
On Friday, February 18, 2011, Jeremy Thomerson
jer...@wickettraining.com wrote:
What does everyone think about the following patch [1] to add two methods to
I suppose it could, although I hadn't really thought about that part of it.
I'm not sure that would be a wise idea, but we're not blocking it that I
know of.
On Sun, Feb 20, 2011 at 10:45 PM, Clint Checketts checke...@gmail.comwrote:
So in theory a behavior implementing this could add
Hi Jeremy,
That sounds nice. I think this can be used to implement the wicket:for attribute
(to automatically set the 'for' attribute on 'label' tags) in a reasonably
elegant way. Though this might not be what you had in mind :)
Regards,
Erik.
Op 19-02-11 04:17, Jeremy Thomerson
What does everyone think about the following patch [1] to add two methods to
IBehavior? Obviously, it's not added directly to IBehavior since that would
be a breaking API change. It's added to a sub-interface that can optionally
be implemented by IBehaviors and is implemented by AbstractBehavior
