That is exactly what i am doing right now. And i have no problem if it
has to stay that way. However I thought i might be helpful for
everyone extending CompoundPropertyModel, and given the fact that none
of the methods in AttachedCompoundPropertyModel are final or otherwise
protected against overriding i though it was an oversight. And like
you said there is not much going on in that class so why not make it
extendable.
just my 2 cents,
Maurice
On 6/17/07, Eelco Hillenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Can't you just create your own version of
AttachedCompoundPropertyModel (you are after all thinking about
extending it, and there isn't so much going on in that class) and
overriding wrapOnInheritance and return an instance of your class?
Eelco
On 6/17/07, Maurice Marrink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi, I am in the process of extending CompoundPropertyModel and its
> inner class AttachedCompoundPropertyModel. However since the last is a
> private inner class i am forced to copy the class definition in to my
> own creating some code duplication. In order to prevent this
> duplication it would be helpful if this inner class was made protected
> instead of private and provided a method to access the owning
> component. These proposed changes are already applied to the attached
> patch. So if everybody agrees the change can be made very quickly.
>
> Index: .
> ===================================================================
> --- . (revision 548032)
> +++ . (working copy)
> @@ -149,7 +149,7 @@
> *
> * @author ivaynberg
> */
> - private class AttachedCompoundPropertyModel extends
AbstractPropertyModel
> + protected class AttachedCompoundPropertyModel extends
AbstractPropertyModel
> implements IWrapModel
> {
> private static final long serialVersionUID = 1L;
> @@ -167,7 +167,14 @@
> super(CompoundPropertyModel.this);
> this.owner = owner;
> }
> -
> + /**
> + * The owning component of this model.
> + * @return the component owning this model.
> + */
> + protected final Component getOwner()
> + {
> + return owner;
> + }
> /**
> * @see
org.apache.wicket.model.AbstractPropertyModel#propertyExpression()
> */
>
>
> What do you think?
>
> Maurice
>
