Can you elaborate?
What (anti)pattern(s) make you think that generics in the components are bad
design?
Besides the effort involved for the wicket developers, as a user I was
leaning the opposite way... But maybe I missed something (not unusual).
- Brill Pappin
-----Original Message-----
From: Jan Kriesten [mailto:
jan.kriesten@...]
Sent: Monday, June 02, 2008 11:23 AM
To:
users@...
Subject: Re: users, please give us your opinion: what is your take on
generics with Wicket
Hi,
> I'm not sure I like where this discussion is going. I don't see anyone
> having any particular objections against current state.
@matej_k:
ugh - you should count again... if I counted right, most of the responses
yet prefer 'Component' /not/ being touched by generics.
> +1, I agree. I think this discussion might be counter-productive if >
folks who aren't using the generified versions are voting.
@jwcarman:
There is an issue with generics on components which is leading into a big
mess - and as far as I can see, many objections are especially on that
topic! It might not be Wicket's fault, though, it might be a language
problem (i.e. Java's to blame).
But IMHO putting generics on Component is a bad design, since it per se
touches all of Wicket's Components without urgent need. Boilerplate over and
over. If I look at my components and libraries (and yes, i have tried out
1.4!) - I have at most 30% of my components containing a Model!
Best regards, --- Jan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
users-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail:
users-help@...
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
users-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail:
users-help@...
