|
»
»
« Return to Thread: users, please give us your opinion: what is your take on generics with Wicket
Re: users, please give us your opinion: what is your take on generics with Wicket
by dabar
::
Rate this Message:
scan this user forum, you will realize that there is no high demand for
generics in wicket from users. I am yet to see one user or thread here of
wicket users screeming out for generics addition. I think users has been
doing just fine without it at least speaking for myself.
Anything more than IModel, I wont upgrade to 1.4 as well
+1 for IModels only
as for as I am concerned, annotations are better 1.5 additions than
generics. generics is just awful
On 6/1/08, atul singh <singhatulkr@...> wrote:
>
> 1)
> [ X] Can best be done in a limited fashion, where we only generify
>
> IModel but not components. I care more about what generifying can do
> for API clarity (declaring a component to only accept certain models
> for instance) than static type checking.
>
> *Reason::* I think generifying data-structure/models is what is
> sustainable.
> Components can become too complicated when gentrified..and who know how far
> wicket wants to go!!
>
> 2)
> [X] I definitively won't be using 1.4. if Wicket doesn't go for my
> preference.
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 2:14 AM, Eelco Hillenius <eelco.hillenius@...
> >
> wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > We have had several threads in this and the dev list, and some
> > discussions in the public on how to incorporate generics in Wicket.
> >
> > I'd like to use this thread to gather the opinions of as many regular
> > Wicket users as we can. Please help us get an impression of what our
> > users think about the issue by completing this simple survey. Note
> > that it is not a vote; we only want to get an idea of what you think.
> >
> > 1) Generifying* Wicket
> > [ ] Can best be done like currently in the 1.4 branch, where models
> > and components are both generified. I care most about the improved
> > static type checking generified models and components give Wicket.
> > [ ] Can best be done in a limited fashion, where we only generify
> > IModel but not components. I care more about what generifying can do
> > for API clarity (declaring a component to only accept certain models
> > for instance) than static type checking.
> > [ ] Should be avoided, I prefer the way 1.3 works. Because... (fill
> > in your opinion here).
> > [ ] .... (anything other than these choices?)
> >
> > 2) How strongly do you feel about your choice above?
> > [ ] Whatever choice ultimately made, I'll happily convert/ start
> > using 1.4 and up.
> > [ ] I might rethink upgrading if my choice doesn't win.
> > [ ] I definitively won't be using 1.4. if Wicket doesn't go for my
> > preference.
> >
> > Thanks in advance for everyone participating, and pls feel free to
> > explain yourself further beyond just answering these questions!
> >
> > Eelco
> >
> > p.s. I suggest that the core devs and most active participants and
> > previous discussions wait a few days before giving their opinions so
> > that we don't flood the thread right from the start.
> >
> > * Parameterizing would probably be the better word to use, but
> > generifying seems to be the word that many people use.
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@...
> > For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@...
> >
> >
>
generics in wicket from users. I am yet to see one user or thread here of
wicket users screeming out for generics addition. I think users has been
doing just fine without it at least speaking for myself.
Anything more than IModel, I wont upgrade to 1.4 as well
+1 for IModels only
as for as I am concerned, annotations are better 1.5 additions than
generics. generics is just awful
On 6/1/08, atul singh <singhatulkr@...> wrote:
>
> 1)
> [ X] Can best be done in a limited fashion, where we only generify
>
> IModel but not components. I care more about what generifying can do
> for API clarity (declaring a component to only accept certain models
> for instance) than static type checking.
>
> *Reason::* I think generifying data-structure/models is what is
> sustainable.
> Components can become too complicated when gentrified..and who know how far
> wicket wants to go!!
>
> 2)
> [X] I definitively won't be using 1.4. if Wicket doesn't go for my
> preference.
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 2:14 AM, Eelco Hillenius <eelco.hillenius@...
> >
> wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > We have had several threads in this and the dev list, and some
> > discussions in the public on how to incorporate generics in Wicket.
> >
> > I'd like to use this thread to gather the opinions of as many regular
> > Wicket users as we can. Please help us get an impression of what our
> > users think about the issue by completing this simple survey. Note
> > that it is not a vote; we only want to get an idea of what you think.
> >
> > 1) Generifying* Wicket
> > [ ] Can best be done like currently in the 1.4 branch, where models
> > and components are both generified. I care most about the improved
> > static type checking generified models and components give Wicket.
> > [ ] Can best be done in a limited fashion, where we only generify
> > IModel but not components. I care more about what generifying can do
> > for API clarity (declaring a component to only accept certain models
> > for instance) than static type checking.
> > [ ] Should be avoided, I prefer the way 1.3 works. Because... (fill
> > in your opinion here).
> > [ ] .... (anything other than these choices?)
> >
> > 2) How strongly do you feel about your choice above?
> > [ ] Whatever choice ultimately made, I'll happily convert/ start
> > using 1.4 and up.
> > [ ] I might rethink upgrading if my choice doesn't win.
> > [ ] I definitively won't be using 1.4. if Wicket doesn't go for my
> > preference.
> >
> > Thanks in advance for everyone participating, and pls feel free to
> > explain yourself further beyond just answering these questions!
> >
> > Eelco
> >
> > p.s. I suggest that the core devs and most active participants and
> > previous discussions wait a few days before giving their opinions so
> > that we don't flood the thread right from the start.
> >
> > * Parameterizing would probably be the better word to use, but
> > generifying seems to be the word that many people use.
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@...
> > For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@...
> >
> >
>
« Return to Thread: users, please give us your opinion: what is your take on generics with Wicket
| Free embeddable forum powered by Nabble | Forum Help |
