It's just my preference. IModel / Model vs. Model / ObjectModel or Model / ModelImpl
Ryan Gravener http://bit.ly/no_word_docs On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 9:25 PM, Matej Knopp <[email protected]> wrote: > Easier? How's that? I find it really annoying that when I'm looking > for something and I have to know upfront whether it is an interface or > a class. And when reading the code, what difference does it really > make if it is interface or a class? By that logic we should start > using hungarian notation. You could easily see what type the class > member is... > > -Matej > > On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 1:55 AM, Ryan Gravener <[email protected]> wrote: >> -1 It's nice to know what is an interface by seeing the I. Also for >> IDEs its easier to find the class I'm looking for. >> >> >> Ryan Gravener >> http://bit.ly/no_word_docs >> >> >> >> On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 7:37 PM, Matej Knopp <[email protected]> wrote: >>> On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 1:29 AM, Altuğ B. Altıntaş <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> what about upgrading projects from 1.4 to 1.5 ? >>>> It breaks compatibility >>> There will be other breaks. This is not a minor update. Breaks >>> compatibility is hardly a valid argument here. We will break >>> compatibility one way or another. But we will also provide migration >>> path. Replacing Model with ObjectModel and then IModel with Model in >>> code (just an made up example) is hardly a task that would prevent >>> anyone from migrating application to 1.5. >>> >>> -Matej >>> >>>> >>>> -1 >>>> >>>> Not: i am not a *committer* but loves wicket :) >>>> >>>> 2009/10/3 Matej Knopp <[email protected]> >>>> >>>>> 1.5 is going to be neither source nor binary compatible. And I >>>>> wouldn't say that consistency and conventions is not a reason. >>>>> >>>>> -Matej >>>>> >>>>> On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 1:14 AM, tetsuo <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> > -1 >>>>> > >>>>> > It breaks compatibility for absolutely no reason. >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 7:45 PM, Johan Edstrom <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> > >>>>> >> +1 >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> On Oct 2, 2009, at 17:28, Igor Vaynberg <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >> >>>>> >> is it perhaps time to take the I out of our interface names? wicket >>>>> >>> has been the only project i have ever worked on/used that follows this >>>>> >>> convention, is it time for a change? >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> this is not meant as a flamewar about which convention is teh >>>>> >>> aw3s0m3st, simply a discussion of whether or not we should switch. >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> -igor >>>>> >>> >>>>> >> >>>>> > >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Altuğ. >>>> >>> >> >
