because the final is there for a very important reason?
-igor
On 9/6/07, Johan Compagner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 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]
> > >
> > >
> >
>
