How would be the Java classes, if multiple wicket:child were supported?!
wicket:extend and wicket:child were build under the base concept of OOP's
inheritance.
looks weird to me. :D
On Nov 4, 2007 9:29 PM, Johan Compagner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > The only requirement would be that if you do choose to support multiple
> > abstract/overridden sections you would need to provide identifiers (just
> > like an abstract method has a name) so that the 'compiler' (wicket)
> > knows which section in a superclass an extended class section is
> > overriding. In pages where only one section is overridden no identifiers
> > would be necessary and so existing markup works without change, the way
> > it does now.
>
>
> isn't this section exactly what igor said in his post?
>
> make 1 page
> that has 2 identifiers (that are 2 divs like
> <div wicket:id="method1"></div>
> <div wicket:id="method2"></div>
>
> and the class had
> abstract class MyBasePage
> {
> MyBasePage()
> {
> add(method1());
> add(method2());
> }
> abstract Panel method1()
> abstract Panel method2()
> }
>
> as far as i know you have pretty much exactly what you describe.
>
> johan
>
--
Bruno Borges
blog.brunoborges.com.br
+55 1185657739
"The glory of great men should always be
measured by the means they have used to
acquire it."
- Francois de La Rochefoucauld
