Now that Emily has cut the legs out from under my main (contrived) argument,
let me indulge my true nature.
I think defensive api design is a lot more valuable in systems programming
than in UI programming. The more we baby-proof our widgets, the more we
frustrate people who want to work around wha
For a little context, here's where this started:
http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit-incubator/issues/detail?id=174
And the sister thread that Daniel opened:
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors/browse_thread/thread/7c568f6c57ab8d73
On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 2:
>
>
> Adding getTextBox() only changes things by giving them access to the one
> that we create if they don't provide their own, right? And it means that we
> have no option to change the implementation in to one that doesn't use a
> text box--right now we're "allowed to" if they use the default co
On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 10:52 AM, Emily Crutcher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thought this conversation should be made public...
>
> Emily mentioned in her review comment for r1180 that the
> DateBox.getTextBox() JavaDoc
> needs a warning about calling setText() directly on the TextBox. Aren't
> th
