what if it is expensive to create it? whose job is it then to cache it?
-igor On 5/7/07, Eelco Hillenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I actually agree with JBQ. It makes it a little bit easier to reuse classes like StringResourceStream while still being efficient (as you wouldn't keep a reference to it/ just create an instance on-the-fly). Eelco On 5/7/07, Ryan Sonnek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > i'm no committer, but i'm -1 for this change. just my 2 cents. > > i'd much rather use constructor arguments to ensure correct > construction than overriding methods. > > On 5/7/07, Jean-Baptiste Quenot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi team, > > > > Thanks for adding wicket-velocity. One suggestion though, can we > > make VelocityPanel abstract to let the user return the > > IStringResourceStream instead of passing it in the constructor? > > That would be nicer. > > > > That would also allow to simplify the example, currently building > > the template inline with StringBuffer. > > > > This is an incompatible change, but nobody depends on it already, > > right? > > > > WDYT? See patch attached. > > -- > > Jean-Baptiste Quenot > > aka John Banana Qwerty > > http://caraldi.com/jbq/ > > > > >
