A component could add a behavior for each model it wants to use:
public class ModelBehavior extends AbstractBehavior {
private IModel model;
public ModelBehavior(IModel model) {
this.model = model;
}
public void detach(Component component) {
this.model.detach();
}
}
public class Label extends WebComponent {
private IModel model;
public Label(IModel model) {
add(new ModelBehavior(this.model = model));
}
}
Detachment will then be automatic.
Sven
Igor Vaynberg schrieb:
you still have ondetach()...but for convinience we can automatically
detach any imodel fields, i actually wanted to do this for a while...
-igor
On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 8:43 AM, Johan Compagner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
and if i store it in metadata ;)
On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 5:16 PM, Igor Vaynberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
why even have an interface? just detach all imodel fields via reflection!
-igor
On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 3:37 AM, James Carman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 4:24 AM, Eelco Hillenius
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
it all depends, on how and what you're developing.
Yeah. I actually use less and less models in the regular way nowadays.
I use plenty of panels (the app I work on hardly uses separate pages)
that nest other panels in them (typically detail views or dialogs)
that reuse models of the parent. But indeed YMMV.
Personally, I think the whole generics business exposes that the
one-one relation between components and models is flawed. Without
generics this isn't much of a problem, just the odd unused member and
constructor, but as generics aren't as 'optional' it is all very in
your face suddenly.
I think on the longer term (post 1.4) we should re-think how models
work in Wicket. See if we can find an elegant way to make this more
flexible (I'm not in favor of the id based thing someone posted
earlier btw) without breaking the whole world.
We discussed this on ##wicket yesterday. I asked why we have models
on all components and someone pointed out that the main reason was
about the detach stuff I believe. But, couldn't that be solved by
having some components that implement something like IModelDriven (or
IModelBacked or whatever) and the detach logic could apply to only
those components? Also, someone has pointed out that when they create
their own components, they sometimes (such as in Palette) have
multiple "models" that they deal with. Allowing components to name
their models what they want would be nice, too.
FWIW, I'm still on the fence when it comes to whether we should go for
a full or partial (models only) implementation of generics, though I'm
leaning towards partial.
Eelco
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
