+1
disagree. this is like having final on methods and classes. it is essential for component developers to be able to communicate their intention by preventing certain kinds of extensions. this is a good change, even if only because it will force subclassers to talk to component makers when component makers have explicitly disabled something. usually there is a reason. if there is no mechanism for preventing extensions, then there is just a steady stream of bugs and general yelling coming from users. that is unreasonable from a component developer's standpoint.
it might be a nice middle ground to require that locked attributes have some kind of explanatory message about why they are locked so that the exception is not generic to the end user, but rather explains why the decision was made.
jon
Gili wrote:
I'm -1 on this one. We should document markup contributions but not prevent the user from doing anything he wants. Alternatively, if we implment this, it should be possible to subclass the class and explicitly remove this lock.
Gili
On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 02:22:14 -0800, SourceForge.net wrote:
Feature Requests item #1164355, was opened at 2005-03-16 11:22
Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by Item Submitter
You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=684978&aid=1164355&group_id=119783
Category: None Group: None Status: Open Priority: 5 Submitted By: Maurice Marrink (mrmean) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: possibility to lock attributes on components
Initial Comment:
Say a developer makes a custom component with a mouseOver attributemodifier. He should be able to prevent users of his component to override the mouseOver attribute. Basicly locking the attribute.
when an attributemodifier is added to a component it should first check if the attribute is not locked.
Although we could add more levels here like : -Open -Append only -Prepend only -Locked
I think it would be best to leave it to the developer if he wants to lock an attribute but still give users the option to add something like an extra JS function that gets called in addition to the developers code. Since the insertion of user code will be very difficult to handle in a generic way.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=684978&aid=1164355&group_id=119783
------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click _______________________________________________ Wicket-develop mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-develop
------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click _______________________________________________ Wicket-develop mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-develop
------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click _______________________________________________ Wicket-develop mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-develop
