I had also hoped that the new Constructor in 2.0 would have been useful.
But, I have been using the following solution in 1.2 / 1.3 to overcome not
having the parent at Component construction time. Then, all of my Panels
extend this Panel instead of the core Panel. It has been working for me for
quite some time.
Chuck
public abstract class InitializablePanel extends Panel {
private boolean initialized;
/**
* Constructor for InitializablePanel
*
* @param id
*/
public InitializablePanel(String id) {
super(id);
commonInit();
}
/**
* Constructor for InitializablePanel
*
* @param id
* @param model
*/
public InitializablePanel(String id, IModel model) {
super(id, model);
commonInit();
}
/**
* commonInit
*/
private void commonInit() {
initialized = false;
}
/**
* This method will be called by onAttach, therefore subclasses
* should override this method to create their components.
*/
protected abstract void createComponents();
/**
* @see wicket.Component#onAttach()
*/
@Override
protected void onAttach() {
if (!initialized) {
createComponents();
initialized = true;
}
}
Rüdiger Schulz-3 wrote:
>
> Same here, having rolled out a 1.2.3 project with no need for updating,
> and currently in the final stages of a 1.2.5 project, which will
> eventually update to 1.3 if it comes out. Never did any tests beyond 1.2.
>
> Regarding the constructor change:
>
> the 1.x way of compiling the hierarchie via add() methods was very
> natural for me, as I have quite some experience in swing. Specifying the
> parent in the constructor always seemed odd to me; still I came across
> some situations where it would have been useful to have it in the
> constructor.
>
> What I once tried was to add all my components in onAttach() but that
> didn't work of course (subcomponents were added again next request). But
> some common method in Component where that could be done *after* the
> constructor would be cool (if that is somehow possible).
>
> What I was looking forward to in 2.x were mostly the Java 5 IModels and
> so on, as I think this would make the code a lot more readable.
>
> Well, just my 2 cents here :)
>
>
> Rüdiger
>
> Dipu schrieb:
>> We are still using 1.2.1 and 1.2.5 for our production and near production
>> projects.
>>
>>
>> Thanks
>> Dipu
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Eelco Hillenius" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> To: "Wicket User List" <[email protected]>
>> Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2007 10:12 PM
>> Subject: [Wicket-user] IMPORTANT: your opinion on the constructor change
>> in2.0
>>
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> We (Wicket's developers) are having some discussion over 1.3 vs 2.0
>>> and how difficult it is as a nun-funded project to spend so much time
>>> synchronizing the branches.
>>>
>>> A major issue in the discussion is that not everyone is convinced
>>> anymore that the constructor change in 2.0 is for the better. There
>>> are pros and cons for sure, but we want to get your opinion on this.
>>>
>>> Please help us out giving your opinion. We want to know:
>>>
>>> 1) Who uses 2.0 for serious projects?
>>>
>>> 2) What do you think of the constructor change? Do you prefer 1.3's
>>> add style or 2.0's style of passing in the parent construction time.
>>>
>>> 3) If we would ever backtrack on the constructor change (*if*, don't
>>> panic for now) how much trouble would that give you?
>>>
>>> Please don't be shy giving your opinion. This is an important issue in
>>> the future development of Wicket.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Eelco
>>>
>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
>>> Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share
>>> your
>>> opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash
>>> http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Wicket-user mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
>>
>>
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
>> Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share
>> your
>> opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash
>> http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wicket-user mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
>>
>>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
> Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share
> your
> opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash
> http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
> _______________________________________________
> Wicket-user mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
>
>
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/IMPORTANT%3A-your-opinion-on-the-constructor-change-in-2.0-tf3358738.html#a9374156
Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
Wicket-user mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
