We never override isRequired in Wicket. So we keep the contract of setRequired. But we shouldn't prevent users to override it. If user wants to break the set contract, it's ok. I don't see anything bad about it.
-Matej On 8/15/07, Johan Compagner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > the problem is that is* should just be overridable, because can we do > setvisible in onattach? dont think so because that makes a new > version. isVis and isEnabled can change between request of a > component, thats why we have to be able to override it. In the end it > is always the developers responsibility.. > > On 8/15/07, Eelco Hillenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 8/15/07, Igor Vaynberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > if we make is* final that means you can no long pull information which > > will > > > lead to ugly code. components that have dynamic * attribute will have to > > > override onattach/onbeforerender and push state in there - which is much > > > uglier then simply overriding is*. > > > > Though obviously the ugly other side to it is that it breaks the > > contract of set*. So we now have the situation where you don't want > > people to override set* because that doesn't give enough guarantees as > > is* might be overriden. Kind of the inverse world if you ask me. > > However, I agree that in general having is* non-final is very > > convenient. I do wonder though how often you would actually use it. I > > have one case where I use it myself, but that's kind of a hack, and > > something I can solve in other ways. > > > > Eelco > > >
