name one good reason to use session in request cycle construction.
Johan Compagner wrote:
>
> Looked at it some more
> this needs to be rollbacked. This is really really bad code.
>
> there are public methods called on the session object that is not fully
> constructed yet
> And the this is given to the newRequestCycle() method.. What if people
> want
> to use there
> own Session object in the RequestCycle create?? That is impossible because
> the Session
> object is not completely valid yet!
>
> We need to find another solution for this because this can't be done.
>
> On 4/11/07, Johan Compagner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> in the constructor:
>>
>> protected Session(Application application, Request request, Response
>> response)
>> {
>> // Construct request cycle (which sets thread local)
>> getRequestCycleFactory().newRequestCycle(this, request,
>> response);
>>
>>
>>
>> and ofcourse normally in the WicketFilter.doGet()
>>
>> please don't tell me this change of the Session constructor (suddenly a
>> response object as a param)
>> and the construction of that request cycle is because of UNIT TESTS????
>> because that would be horrible that we change such a basic code just for
>> unit testing.
>>
>> johan
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/why-are-we-suddenly-creating-2-request-cycles--tf3557832.html#a9958107
Sent from the Wicket - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
