Eelco Hillenius <eelco.hillenius <at> gmail.com> writes:

> However, as a nice alternative, I can see such a
> component live in Wicket extensions.
> 
I agree, this responds to our personnal style of coding and we don't to break
the wicket way of doing things :)
I think we would implement that and if successfull give it a life in Wicket
extensions :)

> 
> There are basically three options how this link could work:
> 1) it invokes the method on the parent
> 2) it invokes the method on the page
> 3) you explictly define the object the method is invoked on
>

We thought about it and as our internal component, we were ready to implement 2)
et 3). In our case we want provide a uniform style of coding : 90% of use cases,
the method is called on the page object. 10% left are filled by 3)
 
> I think 3) would be best as it is always clear what happens, can
> immediately be checked on validity (is the method available) and it's
> also the most flexible way then enables you e.g. to pass command
> objects.
> 
> Furthermore, I don't thing the click method suffices: it probably
> needs the invoking component to be passed in as a call argument, so
> that you can e.g. get it's model.
> 
Agree.

Indeed, thank you all for you answers, i must say we like coding with wicket and
we hope it will continue to focus on making web developper's life easier !




-------------------------------------------------------
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&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642
_______________________________________________
Wicket-user mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user

Reply via email to