On 3/14/06, Vincent Jenks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Oh I see, I hadn't noticed that, sorry. So it's similar to the "managed > bean" concept in JSF? That was one of the things I *didn't* like about JSF, > actually.
I would say it is more like the value object pattern, where you have a - usually shallow - copy of a domain object just for the purpose of passing parameters (input output) around in the view layer. The disadvantage of that pattern is that you'll get quite some code duplication. The advantage is that you'll never have to worry about things like the integrity of your domain objects and whether or not they have stale Hibernate/ EJB3 sessions attached. The difference with JSF is that we don't force you in having any such bean, and that Wicket doesn't manage the beans you provide. Eelco ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid0944&bid$1720&dat1642 _______________________________________________ Wicket-user mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
