[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-1477?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12585160#action_12585160
]
Johan Compagner commented on WICKET-1477:
-----------------------------------------
and if we had such an init method
when is that thing called?
not from a super class constructor i hope?
Then we are again in another balgame because then we have to have after
constructor call initialization
> Constructor code obstructs extendibility of components
> ------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: WICKET-1477
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-1477
> Project: Wicket
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: wicket, wicket-extensions
> Affects Versions: 1.3.2
> Reporter: Rens Verhage
> Fix For: 1.4-M1
>
>
> A lot of components contain way too much initializing code in their
> constructors. In my opinion a constructor ideally should only call super and
> set some private properties. In the current situation I'm very limited in
> extending components for custom usage. An example:
> I'd like to change the hierarchy of the DataGridView in a DataTable.
> Therefore I'd like to extend DataTable. However, since the DataTable
> constructs its DataGridView inside its constructor, I'm obliged to implement
> my own DataTable by copy pasting everything from the wicket-extensions
> DataTable class. I can live with that, but now I have lost the ability to add
> toolbars to my DataTable as the AbstractToolbar expects a wicket-extensions
> DataTable as one of its constructor parameters. Is it possible to revise
> Wicket's components and move initializing code to a init() method so I can
> just override 1 simple method instead of reimplementing the whole Wicket
> framework ;) ?
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
