On Sun, Jun 01, 2008 at 01:44:59PM -0700, Eelco Hillenius wrote:
>
> 1) Generifying* Wicket
> [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.
>
> 2) How strongly do you feel about your choice above?
> [x] Whatever choice ultimately made, I'll happily convert/ start
> using 1.4 and up.
IMHO storing a model in a Component is more a convenience than a
fundamental part of component-ness. This may be part of the reason that
genericizing Component is so contentious.
I have many components with no model and many others, such as a
TextField that uses a parent's CompoundPropertyModel, the component has
a model but I really don't care about the type, since I never call
getModelObject(). In all these cases (which are easily the majority in
my experience), genericized Components would force me to deal with the
syntactic overhead of generics with absolutely zero value.
I'm all for genericizing certain components for which the model is
central (e.g. ListView and Item) but I think genericizing Component is
overkill, since it's relatively rare that I care about the type of a
component's model.
jk
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
users-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail:
users-help@...
