Hi,
Currently we have :
WebApplication.mountPage(path, pageClass) which is a shortcut for
WebApplication.getRootRequestMapperAsCompound().add(new MountedMapper(path,
pageClass));
and org.apache.wicket.protocol.http.WebApplication.mountSharedResource(String,
ResourceReference) which is:
getResourceReferenceRegistry().registerResourceReference(reference);
getRootRequestMapperAsCompound().add(new ResourceMapper(path, reference));
I agree that
getRootRequestMapperAsCompound().add(new MountMapper("pMount", new
PackageMapper( PackageName.forClass(PackageMountedPage.class))));
shows that mappers are flexible but it is also a bit scary. We can add
WebApplication#mountPackage(path, PackageName).
The last reasonable shortcut that we can add is
WebApplication#mountBookmarkable(path, pageClass) which will
be getRootRequestMapperAsCompound().add(new BookmarkableMapper(path,
pageClass));
What do you think ?
2010/11/27 Major Péter <majorpe...@sch.bme.hu>
> Hi,
>
> is there some specific reason, why WebApplication#mount is deprecated in
> 1.5? It could be a really good shortcut:
> mount(new MyMapper("", A.class);
> rather then:
> getRootRequestMapperAsCompound().add(new MyMapper("", A.class));
>
> also PackageMapper looks really weird:
> mount(new MountMapper("/error", new
> PackageMapper(PackageName.forClass(InternalServerError.class))));
>
> PackageMapper is a valid IRequestMapper, so I could write this:
> mount(new PackageMapper(PackageName.forClass(InternalServerError.class)));
> which is syntactically correct, but semantically it's a wtf. (what
> mountpath will be used then, would it even match?)
> Thoughts?
>
> Thanks,
> Peter
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
>
>
