Well, the private acessing functionality was mostly build with situation like
private String myField; new PropertyModel(this, "myField"); i.e. without the setters and getters functionality. But I don't see reason why should getters and setters be ignored, even if they are private. Johan? -Matej On 8/24/07, Sam Hough <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Thanks again Matej, > > At first I just made my setValue method private. I had to remove getValue to > make PropertyModel access the private member. Not sure I'm keen on this > behaviour. We have a long weekend here in the UK so I can ponder it slowly. > Realised I've been avoiding implementing something because I can't think of > a good property name and I don't want to have to fix it in my bean, > component java and component html... Maybe I will go with the verbose > solution. May also stop me pushing lots of rubbish into the model. > > > Matej Knopp-2 wrote: > > > > It's not out of date. PropertyModel provides access to privdate > > properties and it is completely intetional. The reason is actually to > > provide better encapsulation, because if you e.g. bind your component > > to a property of that component, you don't have to provide public > > setters and getters for that property (thus it can't be changed > > outside the component). > > > > -Matej > > > > On 8/24/07, Sam Hough <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >> Thanks Matej, > >> > >> Is this > >> http://wicketstuff.org/wicket13doc/org/apache/wicket/model/PropertyModel.html > >> PropertyModel javadoc out of date where it says that "Note that the > >> property resolver by default provides access to private members and > >> methods. > >> If guaranteeing encapsulation of the target objects is a big concern, you > >> should consider using an alternative implementation." out of date? I'm > >> glad > >> to say it doesn't seem to be true in 1.3.0-beta2 > >> > >> > >> > >> Matej Knopp-2 wrote: > >> > > >> > Hi, > >> > > >> > there's nothing wrong with yor approach, actually, it's more solid > >> > than using (Compound)PropertyModel because you get full refactoring > >> > support. The downside is of course code verbosity. Unless java get > >> > property expression there's not much we can do about it though :-/ > >> > > >> > -Matej > >> > > >> > On 8/24/07, Sam Hough <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> >> > >> >> Does anybody use any other data binding than the built in Wicket > >> classes? > >> >> > >> >> We have few complex objects rather than lots of objects with lots of > >> >> fields > >> >> so having the binding more explicit e.g.: > >> >> add(new TextField("value", new ModelString() { > >> >> public void setString(String p) { > >> >> model.setValue(p); > >> >> } > >> >> public String getString() { > >> >> return model.getValue(); > >> >> } > >> >> })); > >> >> Is tempting as we would get more tool support in eclipse etc and it is > >> >> more > >> >> obvious what is going on. Obviously the huge downside is that it is > >> much > >> >> more verbose than: > >> >> add(new TextField("value")); > >> >> > >> >> Sorry I'm being so greedy on this forum. Still not switched my > >> thinking > >> >> from > >> >> the two extremes of struts and GWT. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> -- > >> >> View this message in context: > >> >> > >> http://www.nabble.com/Alternative-to-Wicket-data-binding-tf4322899.html#a12310156 > >> >> Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> >> > >> >> > >> > > >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > >> -- > >> View this message in context: > >> http://www.nabble.com/Alternative-to-Wicket-data-binding-tf4322899.html#a12312105 > >> Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > >> > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> > >> > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://www.nabble.com/Alternative-to-Wicket-data-binding-tf4322899.html#a12312628 > Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
