|
»
»
« 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 mcomb
::
Rate this Message:
Well, in our case it would almost never be:
MyComponent<MyModel> mycom = new MyComponent<MyModel>();
We don't have many of our own models, we use CompoundPropertyModel
pretty much exclusively (wrapping DAOs or javabeans). So the
verbosity doesn't benefit us much. Also, the vast majority of our
components don't have a model. We generally have a page containing
one or more forms with a CompoundPropModel on each form. Having
generics (particularly if they are just something like <Void>) on
every other object in the page is messy and confusing in my mind.
Telling people to use suppress annotations is not a good solution
either, we want those warnings for other things in our code
(Collections, etc).
-Mike
On Jun 3, 2008, at 8:11 PM, Brill Pappin wrote:
> I guess I'm not understanding why people feel strongly against
> generics in
> the components.
>
> The model is going to use them for the data they contain, but the
> component
> would use them for the model it uses:
>
> MyModel<String> mymodel = new MyModel<String>();
>
> MyComponent<MyModel> mycom = new MyComponent<MyModel>();
>
> And that's all you would ever see of the generics unless you actually
> override one of the components methods (as in a button onclick).
>
> To top it off, I'm not even sure you would have to specify the
> generics for
> the component (not up on my generics coding)... But if the warning
> was
> bugging you, you could simply use a suppress annotation (suppress
> should
> absolutely not be in the API).
>
> More verbose? Yes... Not by much, but it is... However the
> advantages gained
> in terms of readability and type safety are enormous.
>
> - Brill Pappin
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike Comb [mailto:mcomb@...]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2008 4:39 PM
> To: users@...
> Subject: Re: users, please give us your opinion: what is your take on
> generics with 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.
>
> I've spent a couple of afternoons trying to move our app to m1. My
> experience has been that generics on components are absolutely not
> worth it
> for our use cases. I love generics on objects that directly hold data
> (IModel), but they are too verbose and not very useful for objects
> that are
> a few levels removed from the actual data.
>
>> [X ] Whatever choice ultimately made, I'll happily convert/ start
>> using 1.4 and up.
>
> "Happily" probably isn't the word I'd chose, but we'll move to 1.4
> eventually regardless of the decision made.
>
> -Mike
>
> --
> Mike Comb
> Director of Engineering
> SoftCoin, Inc
> mcomb@...
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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@...
>
--
Mike Comb
Director of Engineering
SoftCoin, Inc
mcomb@...
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@...
MyComponent<MyModel> mycom = new MyComponent<MyModel>();
We don't have many of our own models, we use CompoundPropertyModel
pretty much exclusively (wrapping DAOs or javabeans). So the
verbosity doesn't benefit us much. Also, the vast majority of our
components don't have a model. We generally have a page containing
one or more forms with a CompoundPropModel on each form. Having
generics (particularly if they are just something like <Void>) on
every other object in the page is messy and confusing in my mind.
Telling people to use suppress annotations is not a good solution
either, we want those warnings for other things in our code
(Collections, etc).
-Mike
On Jun 3, 2008, at 8:11 PM, Brill Pappin wrote:
> I guess I'm not understanding why people feel strongly against
> generics in
> the components.
>
> The model is going to use them for the data they contain, but the
> component
> would use them for the model it uses:
>
> MyModel<String> mymodel = new MyModel<String>();
>
> MyComponent<MyModel> mycom = new MyComponent<MyModel>();
>
> And that's all you would ever see of the generics unless you actually
> override one of the components methods (as in a button onclick).
>
> To top it off, I'm not even sure you would have to specify the
> generics for
> the component (not up on my generics coding)... But if the warning
> was
> bugging you, you could simply use a suppress annotation (suppress
> should
> absolutely not be in the API).
>
> More verbose? Yes... Not by much, but it is... However the
> advantages gained
> in terms of readability and type safety are enormous.
>
> - Brill Pappin
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike Comb [mailto:mcomb@...]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2008 4:39 PM
> To: users@...
> Subject: Re: users, please give us your opinion: what is your take on
> generics with 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.
>
> I've spent a couple of afternoons trying to move our app to m1. My
> experience has been that generics on components are absolutely not
> worth it
> for our use cases. I love generics on objects that directly hold data
> (IModel), but they are too verbose and not very useful for objects
> that are
> a few levels removed from the actual data.
>
>> [X ] Whatever choice ultimately made, I'll happily convert/ start
>> using 1.4 and up.
>
> "Happily" probably isn't the word I'd chose, but we'll move to 1.4
> eventually regardless of the decision made.
>
> -Mike
>
> --
> Mike Comb
> Director of Engineering
> SoftCoin, Inc
> mcomb@...
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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@...
>
--
Mike Comb
Director of Engineering
SoftCoin, Inc
mcomb@...
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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 |
