Depending on the degree of analness or laziness you can so easily
create subclasses like I have here to save myself some keystrokes.
public class Container extends WebMarkupContainer<Object>
{
public Container(String id)
{
super(id);
setOutputMarkupPlaceholderTag(true);
}
}
On 24 Apr 2008, at 20:52, mnwicket wrote:
I'm glad to see I'm not the only anal developer that hates to see
warnings in
my ide..:)
Patrick Angeles wrote:
How often do people give models to components like Buttons and Links?
Maybe the devs can consider alternate versions of these components
that
aren't generic and don't take a model (or assume
IModel<Object>).
My code is littered with Link<Object> declarations just to
get rid
of the compiler warnings :)
Johan Compagner wrote:
this is fine yes:
TextField<String> tf = new TextField<String>(new
ResourceModel<String>("key"));
the tf.getModel() returns a Model<String> else it cant and
getModelObject
also returns a String.
But i agree for a Button if you dont give a model to it it
doesn't make
sense
But if you give a model it does make sense.
But for a Textfield it makes sense that you generify it even
without a
model
because it does inherit the model from its parent..
so yes its a bit of a split what is nice and what you want to do.
johan
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 3:28 PM, mnwicket <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Thanks Igor....not sure if you really answered what I was
getting at
though.
I understand generics however there are cases in wicket where I'm
wondering
what is best practices.
ie, using your example, a TextField using a ResourceModel, which
way
would
you go;
TextField<String> tf = new TextField<String>(new
ResourceModel<String>("key"));
or just
TextField tf = new TextField(new ResourceModel<String>("key"));
And what do you use as a generic with the following code block;
class MyForm extends Form {
public MyForm() {
add(new AjaxButton('id', this));
}
}
igor.vaynberg wrote:
generic type on Component represents the type of the
modelobject that
component will hold.
eg TextField<Integer> tf=new TextField<Integer>(...);
means that tf.getModelObject() is of type Integer
-igor
On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 5:30 PM, mnwicket <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Ok, so I starting messing around with the new generics
version of
wicket....and I guess I was a little confused as to how many
generics
there
are. Silly question is when people are doing development are
they
turning
off all generic warnings in eclipse...that is if you are using
eclipse?
I only ask because I come across components like TextField that
takes
a
ResourceModel...I understand why the ResourceModel would use a
generic
but
in this case am I forced to put <String> on the TextField.
Another example is AjaxButton that is being added to a form,
what
generic do
I use here? The forms object model type? What if the form
doesn't
have
a
model, say it is using a ValueMap that is a global member of the
form...ie
I've seen this usage in some login example of wicket.
Just looking for some guidance here guys.
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/1.4-Generics-tp16819308p16819308.html
Sent from the Wicket - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/1.4-Generics-tp16819308p16824264.html
Sent from the Wicket - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/1.4-Generics-
tp16819308p16850502.html
Sent from the Wicket - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
