I take the discussion is about removing onPopulate now?
why not keep onPopulate and remove the final?
On 9/6/07, Igor Vaynberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> the reason for it being final is that the super.onbeforerender() call HAS
> to
> be done last, otherwise new items do not get onbeforerender called on
> them.
>
> so if we remove final will you remember to always call it last? i think
> the
> chances are that are pretty small, thus its final.
>
> -igor
>
>
> On 9/6/07, Alex Objelean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> > I've grabbed the latest SNAPSHOT from the repository and have noticed
> that
> > AbstractRepeater#onBeforeRender is final. I wonder what is the reason
> for
> > this? (I need to do something in it's subclass)
> > /**
> > * @see org.apache.wicket.Component#onBeforeRender()
> > */
> > protected final void onBeforeRender()
> > {
> > if (isVisibleInHierarchy())
> > {
> > onPopulate();
> > }
> > super.onBeforeRender();
> > }
> >
> > Alex
> > --
> > View this message in context:
> >
> http://www.nabble.com/Why-the-AbstractRepeater-onBeforeRender-is-final-wicket-1.3.0-SNAPSHOT-%286-sept-2007%29--tf4391492.html#a12520558
> > Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >
>
