This is how getDefaultRequestCycleProcessor looks like. I found
difficult subclass it to make use of my own request cycle processor
because requestCycleProcessor is not accessible in MyApplication.
protected IRequestCycleProcessor getDefaultRequestCycleProcessor()
{
if (requestCycleProcessor == null)
{
requestCycleProcessor = new DefaultWebRequestCycleProcessor();
}
return requestCycleProcessor;
}
Would it make sense to have something like
protected final IRequestCycleProcessor getDefaultRequestCycleProcessor()
{
if (requestCycleProcessor == null)
{
requestCycleProcessor = newDefaultWebRequestCycleProcessor();
}
return requestCycleProcessor;
}
protected IRequestCycleProcessor newDefaultRequestCycleProcessor()
{
return newDefaultWebRequestCycleProcessor();
}
instead?
Juergen
On 1/21/06, Juergen Donnerstag <
[hidden email]> wrote:
> should it be Application.getRequestCycleProcessor rather than ..getDefault...?
>
> Juergen
>
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files
for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes
searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK!
<a href="http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid3432&bid#0486&dat1642">http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid3432&bid#0486&dat1642
_______________________________________________
Wicket-develop mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-develop
Locked
