on removing the finals
The final members are the worst thing I've had to deal with in Wicket
so far.
Although I understand that there may be a reason for them, they are
more a hinderance than anything else and seem to be trying to "protect
users from themselves".
- Brill Pappin
On 12-Jun-08, at 1:03 AM, cowwoc wrote:
Have you considered moving from subclassing to composition in Wicket
using
Callable<T>?
Currently it is quite common for developers to subclass a component
in order
to override isVisible() and other properties. I am proposing that
instead
the component classes become final and properties may only be set
using
setter methods. The setter methods would take Callable<T> instead of
T, so
for example setVisible(boolean) would become
setVisible(Callable<Boolean>)
The benefit of this approach is that you could introduce static
factory
methods to the Wicket components which would make them much easier
to use in
their Generic form. You could then introduce various helper classes to
create Callable<T> for constant values, such as
Callable.valueOf(true) would
return a Callable<Boolean> that always returns true.
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/users%2C-please-give-us-your-opinion%3A-what-is-your-take-on-generics-with-Wicket-tp17589984p17792488.html
Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
