i wouldnt say it is an antipattern.
-igor
On 9/23/07, carloc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Hi guys I was just wondering if this is an antipattern in wicket.
> Instead of using anonymous Button classes, I created a Button Command
> Class
> which I override.
> I also created a class which indicates the button that I need.
> I did this so I can be sure that I will be able to catch all the default
> exceptions that exist.
> Also any change in the button implementation I'll only change in one
> place.
>
> Is this an anti pattern?>
> I call it in my pages through this command
>
> add(new CCTIButton("ajax-button", this, buttonCommand));
>
>
> public abstract class ButtonCommand implements Serializable {
> public abstract void onSubmit();
> public abstract void onError();
> }
>
>
> public class CCTIButton extends IndicatingAjaxButton {
>
> private ButtonCommand buttonCommand;
>
> public CCTIButton(String id, Form form, ButtonCommand
> buttonCommand) {
> super(id, form);
> this.buttonCommand = buttonCommand;
> }
>
> @Override
> protected void onSubmit(AjaxRequestTarget target, Form form) {
> // TODO Auto-generated method stub
> try {
> buttonCommand.onSubmit();
> } catch(Exception e) {
>
> }
>
> }
>
> @Override
> protected void onError(AjaxRequestTarget target, Form form) {
> // TODO Auto-generated method stub
> buttonCommand.onError();
> }
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://www.nabble.com/Button-Command-Design-Pattern-tf4504772.html#a12847315
> Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
