> 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)
Yeah, the disadvantage of calling the page object is that it is not suited for writing reusable code. For instance, if you write a panel with a link that makes that call, and you decide to reuse it in another page, you would have to implement that method in that page too (or make sure that method is in some base class), but the compiler is never going to warn you about it. I would argue to support just method for clarity, and that would be nbr 3 as it is explicit and reusable in any situation. Also just passing in MyPage.this in the constructor isn't that much of a code bloat, right? > 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 ! That's what we are doing it for. We aim for making our developer's life not only easier, but also more fun in general. We believe a framework should not only be about how fast/ easy you can do stuff, but also about the 'art parts' of programming: elegance, expressive power, etc. It's exiting to see that many people like that and participate in Wicket by discussing ideas and sending in patches etc. 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 Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
