click-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Malcolm Edgar <malcolm.ed...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Method chaining revisited
Date Sun, 05 Jul 2009 00:11:53 GMT
Agree, but I think this is how people would probably use it. The
TableBuilder and FormBuilder would have 95% of the code you would need
and then you would subclass it to provide that last 5% for your work.

regards Malcolm Edgar

On Sat, Jul 4, 2009 at 1:35 PM,
contactme42@gmail.com<contactme42@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yeah builders/factories are great for building click forms/tables, but I
> find writing my own much more flexible because I always tend to customize
> the objects created.
>
> Huy
>>
>> Hi Malcolm,
>>
>> This looks awesome. Definitely makes for good examples.
>>
>> regards
>>
>> bob
>>
>>
>> Malcolm Edgar wrote:
>>>
>>> Please see the JIRA below:
>>>
>>> http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLK-565
>>>
>>> This provides two example patterns. I think it would be good to
>>> include something like this in click extras.
>>>
>>> regards Malcolm Edgar
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 3:11 AM, Adrian A.<a.adrian.tech@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> This is a topic I wanted to raise for 2.2 is introducing a
>>>>> builder/factory capability in Click.  We have used this in projects
>>>>> and it greatly number of lines of code. Personally I think this is a
>>>>> better approach than method chaining.
>>>>
>>>> +1 for this (instead of method chaining). The same for other frequently
>>>> used
>>>> APIs.
>>>>
>>>>> I
>>>>> will u pload some builder/factory patterns later today.
>>>>
>>>> Any news on this?
>>>>
>>>> Thank you,
>>>>
>>>> Adrian.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>

Mime
View raw message