pros:
* free to call any method in the constructor like getpage(), urlfor(), etc.
* access to markup attributes in constructor as opposed to render time
* fail at component instantiation time rather then render time if there is a
hierarchy<->java mismatch - so you get a java line-precise error as opposed
to our error webpage
cons:
* code explosion
2.0: http://papernapkin.org/pastebin/view/4900
1.3: http://papernapkin.org/pastebin/view/4908
* hacks necessary for nontrivial components
GridView.populate()
http://papernapkin.org/pastebin/view/4902
notice fake1,fake2 parents necessary for child item instantiation and which
are later removed
* more limited in how the hierarchy is created since it MUST be created
top-down
* replacing components is less explicit.
1.3: a.replaceWith(new B());
2.0: new B(a.getParent(), a.getId());
-igor
On 3/6/07, Jonathan Locke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
i would like to see a list of what we'd lose by not supporting the
constructor change. i actually prefer the add() usage and always
have. i just don't want us to forget why we originally wanted to
make the constructor change. the only two things i can recall are:
- better diagnostics, but i can't recall exactly /what/ diagnostics we
thought we'd get
- ability to make component init dependent on parental context. this
might
be either xml association or component data somehow. i can't think of any
times i've been screaming to do this, but can anyone give some of the best
examples so we can evaluate what we'd be losing here?
Eelco Hillenius wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> We (Wicket's developers) are having some discussion over 1.3 vs 2.0
> and how difficult it is as a nun-funded project to spend so much time
> synchronizing the branches.
>
> A major issue in the discussion is that not everyone is convinced
> anymore that the constructor change in 2.0 is for the better. There
> are pros and cons for sure, but we want to get your opinion on this.
>
> Please help us out giving your opinion. We want to know:
>
> 1) Who uses 2.0 for serious projects?
>
> 2) What do you think of the constructor change? Do you prefer 1.3's
> add style or 2.0's style of passing in the parent construction time.
>
> 3) If we would ever backtrack on the constructor change (*if*, don't
> panic for now) how much trouble would that give you?
>
> Please don't be shy giving your opinion. This is an important issue in
> the future development of Wicket.
>
> Regards,
>
> Eelco
>
>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
> Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share
> your
> opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash
>
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
> _______________________________________________
> Wicket-user mailing list
> Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
>
>
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/IMPORTANT%3A-your-opinion-on-the-constructor-change-in-2.0-tf3358738.html#a9342589
Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share
your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
Wicket-user mailing list
Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
Wicket-user mailing list
Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
