log.warn would be annoying to people who are actually setting the visibility to false
-igor On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 8:40 AM, jbrookover <jbrooko...@cast.org> wrote: > > Hey all, > > I just had a long debugging session regarding the difference between these > two lines in a WebPage: > > add(component).setVisible(getUser() != null); // Typo > add(component.setVisible(getUser() != null)); > > The first processes the page and very silently returns a completely empty > Response object to the browser. The second is what I meant to do, but the > mistake was hard to discover. > > Per a post in 2006 > (http://apache-wicket.1842946.n4.nabble.com/Nice-stupid-thing-page-setVisible-false-td1898368.html), > the decision was made regarding this behavior, but is setting a Page's > visibility common enough to do so without warning? Perhaps a log.warn? > > Thanks! > > Jake > -- > View this message in context: > http://apache-wicket.1842946.n4.nabble.com/Invisible-Page-Notification-tp2247626p2247626.html > Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
