Argh, that is horrible. :(
2009/11/17 Igor Vaynberg <igor.vaynb...@gmail.com>
> not to mention that some components have 6 constructors, and that
> means having 6 of methods :|
>
> -igor
>
> On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 9:33 AM, Jeremy Thomerson
> <jer...@wickettraining.com> wrote:
> > Because we'll get questions to the list like:
> >
> > How can I create my own component since I have to instantiate them using
> > Label.of("foo", PropertyModel.of(bar, "foo"))? How can I override that?
> Do
> > I have to override the static method "of"?
> >
> > Sadly, I think that's what it will cause.
> >
> > --
> > Jeremy Thomerson
> > http://www.wickettraining.com
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 10:50 AM, nino martinez wael <
> > nino.martinez.w...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> im +1, unless Jeremy can tell why he believes it will hit a anti
> patter..
> >>
> >> 2009/11/16 Jeremy Thomerson <jer...@wickettraining.com>
> >>
> >> > On Sun, Nov 15, 2009 at 11:39 AM, Martijn Dashorst <
> >> > martijn.dasho...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > i.e. ModelType.of(....)
> >> > >
> >> > > I am +1 for adding these methods.
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> > I'm +1 for the model-type methods, although there are so many models
> that
> >> > are not final classes that it really won't save tons of code. Mainly
> in
> >> > the
> >> > *PropertyModel family.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > > We can do the same for components, although the benefit is typically
> >> > > less, and it might even send our users down the wrong path thinking
> >> > > they can't use the 'new' keyword.
> >> > >
> >> > > TextField<String> field = TextField.of("someId",
> PropertyModel.of(foo,
> >> > > "property"));
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> > I'm -1 on doing it for components. I think it will lead to an
> >> > anti-pattern.
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Jeremy Thomerson
> >> > http://www.wickettraining.com
> >> >
> >>
> >
>
