I think ajax fallback strategy is a good idea:
class AjaxFallbackEvent{
void handleSomething( target){
// user implementations test for target == null
}
}
On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 4:38 AM, Per Newgro per.new...@gmx.ch wrote:
Hi *,
i would like to know if there hidden consequences if i exchange sharing
by attribute through sharing by static determination.
To couple my event-components with it's higher ranking components i use a
listener based approach. Each parent adds a
listener to the child can be involved if an event occurs.
The problem is that i sometimes use ajax event components and sometimes
not. Thus until now i have to provide two different
event classes. The one for ajax usage contains an attribute with the
current ajax request target. The event sources creates the
event and provides the request target.
But now if found AjaxRequestTarget.get. Javadoc says Static method that
returns current |AjaxRequestTarget|
http://wicket.apache.org/docs/1.4/org/apache/wicket/ajax/AjaxRequestTarget.html
or |null| of no |AjaxRequestTarget|
http://wicket.apache.org/docs/1.4/org/apache/wicket/ajax/AjaxRequestTarget.html
is available.
So this exactly what i tried to achieve with the two event types.
So my question is: Can i simplify my event objects by throwing the request
target attribute away and use the AjaxRequestTarget.get method in my
listener chain?
Or why is this not a good idea?
Thanks for clearing it to me.
Cheers
Per
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
--
Pedro Henrique Oliveira dos Santos