I'll hopefully have a chance to poke around at that code tonight and make a decision then as to what I have time to implement.
On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 12:41 PM, Ray Ryan <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 10:29 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: > >> http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1149803/show >> >> Thanks so much for reviewing this guys. >> >> @Ray, >> >> Do you want me to go back to allowing a setter for the caption? >> >> > I certainly wouldn't want to see both the setter and the constructor. > > If you want to go for the setter after all, John will need to scrutinize > the code that orphans the previous header, and support for setHeader(null), > including unit tests — I'll screw it up. And you'll want to give it an > @UiChild annotation. > > If you want to stick with the constructor, the changes to DialogBoxParser > and DialogBoxParserTest to make it UiBinder friendly are pretty simple. And > if I get to pick, yes, a full blown setter-based implementation is > preferable. I'm just trying not to ask for the moon. > -- http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
