Is this the situation where Mixin could be of good use?
On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 5:55 AM, Adam Zimowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I need to save some additional state into textfield, something similar
> to form context. I would have simply done:
>
> public class TextFieldWithMap extends TextField {
>
> @Parameter(defaultPrefix="prop")
> private Map<String, Object> _dataMap;
>
>
> public void setDataMap(Map<String, Object> aDataMap) {
> _dataMap = aDataMap;
> }
>
> public Object getDataValue(String aKey) {
> try { return _dataMap.get(aKey); }
> catch(NullPointerException npe) { return null; }
> }
> }
>
> but TextField is a final class. Instead, I had to duplicate Tapestry
> code and extend AbstractTextField:
>
> public class TextFieldWithMap extends AbstractTextField {
>
> @Parameter(defaultPrefix="prop")
> private Map<String, Object> _dataMap;
>
>
> // This is very UGLY (copied from TextField)
> @Override
> protected final void writeFieldTag(MarkupWriter aWriter, String
> aValue) {
> aWriter.element(
> "input","type", "text","name",
> getControlName(),"id", getClientId(),
> "value", aValue,"size", getWidth());
> }
>
> // This too, is very UGLY (copied from TextField)
> final void afterRender(MarkupWriter writer) {
> writer.end();
> }
>
> public void setDataMap(Map<String, Object> aDataMap) {
> _dataMap = aDataMap;
> }
>
> public Object getDataValue(String aKey) {
> try { return _dataMap.get(aKey); }
> catch(NullPointerException npe) { return null; }
> }
> }
>
> My TextFieldWithMap component works as expected, I'm only asking what
> are the reasons for TextField being a final class, and is my way of
> building TextFieldWithMap typical "Tapestry 5" approach or should I do
> it differently.
>
> -adam
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
