>
>
> Well, the second version uses constructer injection. Some frameworks
> prefer that approach.
>
> But, I see your point.
>
You should not be calling a service or dao directly in your constructor,
regardless of whether you are using dependency injection or not. This is
bad. That's what mode
>
>
> Well, the second version uses constructer injection. Some frameworks
> prefer that approach.
>
> But, I see your point.
>
You should not be calling a service or dao directly in your constructor,
regardless of whether you are using dependency injection or not. This is
bad. That's what mode
-Original Message-
From: Jeremy Thomerson [mailto:jer...@wickettraining.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2010 3:25 PM
To: users@wicket.apache.org
Subject: Re: Newbie question anti-patterns and wicket, constructor
component building
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 2:11 PM, Brown, Berlin [GCG-PFS
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 2:11 PM, Brown, Berlin [GCG-PFS] <
berlin.br...@primerica.com> wrote:
> I am sorry, am just getting used to Wicket but I notice a lot of use of
> calling a lot of code in the constructor. Does it really matter? I
> mention it because this kind of style makes it difficult
I am sorry, am just getting used to Wicket but I notice a lot of use of
calling a lot of code in the constructor. Does it really matter? I
mention it because this kind of style makes it difficult to test code
because code in the constructor may fail and the object won't be
created.
Should I jus
