If the question is ressurecting again and again then it is an evidence that there is something to address and improve. At least Wicket does not have a method with self-documented name which deffers component creation. As the result people have to search (using different words) and they don't satisfy with the result 'cause the topic is still looks open.
This list is quite active and I appreciate the answers of core developers. Probably Wicket is so good because in addition to the devotion of talented and capable people to implementation, they do hear what the users say directly, not indirectly via support team. Jeremy Thomerson-5 wrote: > > I actually had to Google that one. But, yes, that is the general > consensus that I've seen. If you wanted to write a page that showed > the different ways that you mentioned, that would be fine. It really > just depends on if you really need lazy component creation, and then > how you want to implement it. > > -- > Jeremy Thomerson > http://www.wickettraining.com > > > > > On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 11:13 AM, Clint Popetz <[email protected]> wrote: >> TMTOWTDI > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Component-creation-and-initialization-tp23545666p23582495.html Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
