Hi,
At the current implementation they need to do
cols.add(new LocationColumLocation(...));
instead of just
cols.add(new LocationColum(...));
I think you mean LocationColumnPerson.
nice feature of PropertyColums: Not to have a too strength coupling of
what the column displays in the cell and
Hi Sven,
I did already implement it this way... and its working.
But my team members asked (more the client developers point of view),
why the column-class itself is not a generic of Location, like this.
public class LocationColumn extends PropertyColumnLocation {
...
}
At the current
Hi Patrick,
you can let your column implementation be generic:
public class LocationColumnT extends PropertyColumnT {
public LocationColumn(String expressionToLocation){
super(Model.of(Location), expressionToLocation);
}
@Override
public
Hi all,
whats the meaning of generic T on DataTables vs T of IColumn and T of
ICellPopulator?
As I understand its the type of object shown by the table rows.
Reading the javadoc of AbstractColumn it says T (if I understand
correct), its the type of object shown by the cell itself.
But
Hi,
generic T is identical for the DataTable, and it's IColumns: it's the
type of the row models.
A column is responsible to provide a cell component for a row: For
DataTable only the input (e.g. Person) is interesting, the output
(Location) doesn't matter.
Your LocationColumn should
Hi Sven,
thanx for feedback.
Ok, how to implement the LocationColumn more reusable?
I dont want to be bound to a Datatable of Persons.
I'd like to have a Column which works with a Locations, independently
from which model-object the expression fetches the Location.
Is there any way to do
Hi,
There is a discussion about this since Wicket 1.4 (the first version of
Wicket built against JDK 1.5).
The main stopper is that using generics makes the code even more verbose.
And many people don't like this.
So there are few Generic*** versions of the most used components.
Martin Grigorov
Hi,
Already in Wicket there is GenericPanel, GenericWebPage,
GenericFragment, IGenericComponent, and IModel of course is already
generic.
But there is still IBehavior without Generics and several standard
components which do not implement IGenericComponent such a Label.
Are there plans
I see, I guess this was summarized here:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/generics
On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 2:27 PM, Martin Grigorov mgrigo...@apache.org wrote:
Hi,
There is a discussion about this since Wicket 1.4 (the first version of
Wicket built against JDK 1.5
Hi, I have just created a ticket here with a quickstart to demo the problem:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-5808
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-wicket.1842946.n4.nabble.com/SpringBean-doesn-t-support-Generics-tp4668928p4668937.html
Sent from the Users forum mailing
here:
http://spring.io/blog/2013/12/03/spring-framework-4-0-and-java-generics .
However, I'm experiencing problems when using generic beans with Wicket's
SpringBean.
I basically have following situation, two concrete dao's that implement a
generic typed interface dao.:
class Product{}
class
Spring 4 is able to wire/inject generic beans, as described here:
http://spring.io/blog/2013/12/03/spring-framework-4-0-and-java-generics .
However, I'm experiencing problems when using generic beans with Wicket's
SpringBean.
I basically have following situation, two concrete dao's that implement
Confused I am not :)
Let me give you three examples...
I. filtering with a subset of properties
This is a class that worked perfectly in 1.4.19:
public class CustomersDataProvider extends
HibernateDataProviderCustomer implements
IFilterStateLocatorCustomerFilter {
@SuppressWarnings(unused)
I think you're confused.
If you want to filter a collection based on type T, then your filter your
extend T.
The idea here is that your model object type for the filter is the same as
that retrieved by the data provider.
As such you can have a POJO of the same type T on which you apply the
I started migrating my code from wicket 1.4.19 to 6. Finally ! :)
I found a FilterToolbar bug:
Once you were able to create DataTableUser wrapped inside of
FilterFormUserFilterDto
currently FilterToolbar requires you for those two types to be identical:
public T, S FilterToolbar(final
Hi,
wouldn't it be nice if Panel had type param - PanelT - which would be
used for:
IModelT getDefaultModel()
T getDefaultModelObject()
Or why is it not so?
Thanks,
Ondra
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
See GenericPanel and few other components which implement IGenericComponent
We may make them all generic for Wicket 7 if JDK 7 is minimum and diamonds
can be used.
On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 3:28 PM, Ondrej Zizka ozi...@redhat.com wrote:
Hi,
wouldn't it be nice if Panel had type param - PanelT -
the raw type Form in wicket 1.5.6.
Could a committer please change the return type back to Form? so we
don't have to suppress those annoying generics warnings?
thanks.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr
);
/
Because setRequired is actually implemented in FormComponent and returns a
FormComponent. By adding the component type to the generics of FormComponent
and casting the return value, this could be resolved.
/public abstract class FormComponentT, C/
/{
public C setRequired(boolean required
Attila, thank you for your information.
On 7/3/11 1:37 AM, Attila Király wrote:
Hi Duy,
Generics were added only to the 1.5 branch of inmethod-grid. There is no
plan to backport this to the 1.4 branch.
Attila
2011/7/2 Duy Dodoquoc...@gmail.com
Hi wicketers,
I found inmethod-gric generics
Hi wicketers,
I found inmethod-gric generics for wicket 1.5 on wicketstuff but can not
find one for wicket 1.4.x. Is there any maven repo for 1.4.x?
Thanks,
Duy
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
Hi Duy,
Generics were added only to the 1.5 branch of inmethod-grid. There is no
plan to backport this to the 1.4 branch.
Attila
2011/7/2 Duy Do doquoc...@gmail.com
Hi wicketers,
I found inmethod-gric generics for wicket 1.5 on wicketstuff but can not
find one for wicket 1.4.x
For example in Session there is the method:
public final M extends Serializable M getMetaData(final MetaDataKeyM
key)
This makes it seriously difficult to use this methods for retrieving
vales that have e.g. a MetaDataKeyCollectionString, since Collection
does not extend Serializable (although
thats there to give developers a better hint. i am not too opposed to
removing it. feel free to file an rfe.
-igor
On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 3:08 AM, Pointbreak
pointbreak+wicketst...@ml1.net wrote:
For example in Session there is the method:
public final M extends Serializable M
Hello,
the generics solution for the DropdownChoice is weird in my opinion.
I want to write like this:
ListGender genders = getGenderList();
DropdownChoicePerson new DropDownChoicePerson(fieldId, new
PropertyModelPerson(currentPerson, gender), genders);
But the compilation fails because
ListGender genders = getGenderList();
DropdownChoicePerson new DropDownChoicePerson(fieldId, new
PropertyModelPerson(currentPerson, gender), genders);
The class type parameter for the dropdown and models there should be Gender:
That the model delegates to a property in a Person object should
,
the generics solution for the DropdownChoice is weird in my opinion.
I want to write like this:
ListGender genders = getGenderList();
DropdownChoicePerson new DropDownChoicePerson(fieldId, new
PropertyModelPerson(currentPerson, gender), genders);
But the compilation fails because of the mismatch
Coming up to speed in Wicket and see some things that I don't know how to
interpret regarding generics.
First, I have a form subclass that looks like this:
private class MyForm extends Form
Eclipse shows the following warning:
Form is a raw type. References to generic type FormT
-Wicket-and-generics-tp2341004p2341007.html
Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 8:37 AM, Mike Dee mdichiapp...@cardeatech.com wrote:
I'd like to try and understand this. What could T possibly be?
It would be whatever your form is editing.
But isn't TextField implying text (or a string). Would TextFieldInteger
make sense (haven't tried it yet)?
On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 8:40 AM, Mike Dee mdichiapp...@cardeatech.com wrote:
Also noticed in prior messages with similar topic that someone suggested
using Void (FormVoid). Never knew there was a Void keyword (capital V).
Is this a recommended technique for Form (ie. FormVoid)?
It's
-Wicket-and-generics-tp2341004p2341026.html
Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
? For example, picture a login screen that
simply capture username and password strings.
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-wicket.1842946.n4.nabble.com/Question-about-Wicket-and-generics-tp2341004p2341026.html
Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com
Great, didn't know there was a built in LoginForm.
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-wicket.1842946.n4.nabble.com/Question-about-Wicket-and-generics-tp2341004p2341060.html
Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com
On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 11:41 AM, Mike Dee mdichiapp...@cardeatech.com wrote:
In my experience, there are lots of other situations too. For example, we
have lots of forms for doing searches. The form gathers the search
criteria. Maybe it would make sense to have a SearchFormCriteria class,
i have written plenty forms and about 99% of them have FormVoid.
models on the form are just not that useful, its the fields that
care.
-igor
On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 5:45 AM, James Carman
ja...@carmanconsulting.com wrote:
On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 8:40 AM, Mike Dee mdichiapp...@cardeatech.com
just offering the other side of the coin...i didnt say we were going
to yank the generics from the Form, chill :)
-igor
On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 8:38 AM, James Carman
ja...@carmanconsulting.com wrote:
On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 11:34 AM, Igor Vaynberg igor.vaynb...@gmail.com
wrote:
i have
be the model? How are others doing this?
Mike
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-wicket.1842946.n4.nabble.com/Question-about-Wicket-and-generics-tp2341004p2341288.html
Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com
@wicket.apache.org
Betreff: Re: Question about Wicket and generics
On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 11:34 AM, Igor Vaynberg igor.vaynb...@gmail.com wrote:
i have written plenty forms and about 99% of them have FormVoid.
models on the form are just not that useful, its the fields that
care.
That doesn't mean that's
this message in context:
http://apache-wicket.1842946.n4.nabble.com/Question-about-Wicket-and-generics-tp2341004p2341500.html
Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr
I was just attempt to use the ListChoice and it seems to me that the
constructor signatures are wrong.
The model for this should be List? extends T not ListT, otherwise you can't
select more than one item (T), which is the point..
D/
ListChoice doesn't allow you to choose multiple. You want ListMultipleChoice.
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 8:29 AM, Douglas Ferguson
doug...@buzzstream.com wrote:
I was just attempt to use the ListChoice and it seems to me that the
constructor signatures are wrong.
The model for this should be
surely know, this book is based on Wicket 1.3, that does NOT use
generics, while the current version is 1.4 and DOES use them (as will do
the next ones).
Put aside this page:
https://cwiki.apache.org/WICKET/migrating-to-wicket-14.html#MigratingtoWicket1.4-Modelchanges
I was unable to find
Hi All,
I'm new to Wicket and I'm studying it using Wicket in Action. As you
surely know, this book is based on Wicket 1.3, that does NOT use
generics, while the current version is 1.4 and DOES use them (as will do
the next ones).
Put aside this page:
https://cwiki.apache.org/WICKET/migrating
Hi All,
I'm new to Wicket and I'm studying it with Wicket in Action. As you
surely know, this book is based on Wicket 1.3, that does NOT use
generics, while the current version is 1.4 and DOES use them (as will do
the next ones).
Put aside this page:
https://cwiki.apache.org/WICKET/migrating
On 06/25/10 09:17, Alessandro Bottoni wrote:
Hi All,
I'm new to Wicket and I'm studying it using Wicket in Action. As you
surely know, this book is based on Wicket 1.3, that does NOT use
generics, while the current version is 1.4 and DOES use them (as will do
the next ones).
Put aside this page
this right
(just add a generics wildcard)?
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
I've noticed in some places where generics wildcards may be useful that
they are not used. For example, in IColumn.
If I have a Type and a SubType that extends Type, I can't use
IColumnType in a DataTableSubType. Is there any reason for this or
was it just not implemented? Not the most necessary
, listPropertyFromThatBean))
On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 12:29 PM, Sam Barrow s...@sambarrow.com wrote:
I've noticed in some places where generics wildcards may be useful that
they are not used. For example, in IColumn.
If I have a Type and a SubType that extends Type, I can't use
IColumnType in a DataTableSubType
That's exactly what I do now (wrapped model). Just wondering if there was a
technical reason behind it.
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
-Original Message-
From: Pedro Santos pedros...@gmail.com
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2010 13:03:16
To: users@wicket.apache.org
Subject: Re: Generics
now (wrapped model). Just wondering if there was a
technical reason behind it.
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
-Original Message-
From: Pedro Santos pedros...@gmail.com
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2010 13:03:16
To: users@wicket.apache.org
Subject: Re: Generics
Basically the list view
What's the best practice when using generics with models that take some
object but return another type of object?
examples:
When you have a collection and need to convert it to a list for listview
purposes.
When you have some object and you need a wrapping model that creates some
string
()
{
delegate.detach();
}
}
-igor
On Wed, Dec 30, 2009 at 5:23 AM, Sam Zilverberg samzilverb...@gmail.com wrote:
What's the best practice when using generics with models that take some
object but return another type of object?
examples:
When you have a collection and need to convert
Greetings, Wicket Wizards,
I am updating a sample Wicket program from 1.3.6 to 1.4.3 and running into
a few generics-related issues. I am hoping you folks can quickly set me
straight. My code appears to run successfully and passes its JUnit tests,
despite the warnings I would like to remove
.
*/
public String getAddress() {
return address;
}
}
}
at least on my IDE
Best,
Ernesto
On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 9:42 AM, Philip Johnson john...@hawaii.edu wrote:
Greetings, Wicket Wizards,
I am updating a sample Wicket program from 1.3.6 to 1.4.3 and running into
a few generics-related
:42 AM, Philip Johnson john...@hawaii.edu wrote:
Greetings, Wicket Wizards,
I am updating a sample Wicket program from 1.3.6 to 1.4.3 and running into
a few generics-related issues. I am hoping you folks can quickly set me
straight. My code appears to run successfully and passes its JUnit
Thanks so much, both of you!
Anyone have any ideas about the WicketTester code?
Problem 3: WicketTester and generics.
I clearly don't understand how to test with WicketTester. Take a look at
lines 37-39 of TestListPage:
http://code.google.com/p/ics-wicket-examples/source/browse/trunk
. Oktober 2009 17:26
An: users@wicket.apache.org
Cc: e...@shinsetsu.nl
Betreff: Re: inmethod datagrid and wicket 1.4 and generics
I think there is a datagrid project in wicket stuff jira. If you do
any work (against current trunk - not 1.3) patch is always welcome.
You can create a jira issue
way. Approx
half of inmehtod grid is generic now.
Stefan
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Matej Knopp [mailto:matej.kn...@gmail.com]
Gesendet: Montag, 12. Oktober 2009 17:26
An: users@wicket.apache.org
Cc: e...@shinsetsu.nl
Betreff: Re: inmethod datagrid and wicket 1.4 and generics
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Matej Knopp [mailto:matej.kn...@gmail.com]
Gesendet: Dienstag, 13. Oktober 2009 12:08
An: users@wicket.apache.org
Betreff: Re: inmethod datagrid and wicket 1.4 and generics
Sure. If you have commit access to wicket stuff feel free to branch the trunk.
-Matej
On Tue
nope. No problem for me. Try pasting here the problematic code
On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 10:50 AM, Douglas Ferguson
doug...@douglasferguson.us wrote:
Has anybody else had problems with AutoCompleteTextField and generics.
It almost seems like I'm dealing with an eclipse bug.
But basically if I
? Is it still under development? Does it
support generics now?
Does anybody use it togehter with wicket 1.4?
Stefan
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h
since the end of last year. Is it
compatible with wicket 1.4? Is it still under development? Does it
support generics now?
Does anybody use it togehter with wicket 1.4?
Stefan
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr
Has anybody else had problems with AutoCompleteTextField and generics.
It almost seems like I'm dealing with an eclipse bug.
But basically if I call
behavior.getChoices.add(xxx) it is always highlighted in red because,
I am restricted by the model use T but the list wants ? extends T.
D
it
support generics now?
Does anybody use it togehter with wicket 1.4?
Stefan
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
since the end of last year. Is it
compatible with wicket 1.4? Is it still under development? Does it
support generics now?
Does anybody use it togehter with wicket 1.4?
Stefan
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr
Thenk you all for your replies!
I found a hand full of mailing list entrys with hints for patches to
make some classes generic. Are there any attempts to integrate them into
the current trunk? I think a generic IGridColumn would be very handy.
Should I start doing it?
Stefan
I think there is a datagrid project in wicket stuff jira. If you do
any work (against current trunk - not 1.3) patch is always welcome.
You can create a jira issue for it and attach it there.
-Matej
On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 5:24 PM, Stefan Lindner lind...@visionet.de wrote:
Thenk you all for
Hi Jonny,
yes, it works exactly like you described it.
Sven
jwray wrote:
Hi Sven,
Thanks for your reply. Since I sent the original question I ended up doing
what you suggested and now I'm wondering why I ever used the id projection
approach. Habit I guess, formed with previous frameworks.
Hi,
Working on my first application using 1.4.x and generics and have a
question regarding the use of SortableDataProvider. Within my extensions
of this class I quite commonly obtain the id of an object within the
iterator method and then load the object via a LoadableDetchableModel
within
required
objects at once.
Sven
jonny.w...@fiveprime.com wrote:
Hi,
Working on my first application using 1.4.x and generics and have a
question regarding the use of SortableDataProvider. Within my extensions
of this class I quite commonly obtain the id of an object within the
iterator method
your domain objects in the first place?
They will be loaded anyway to be displayed on your component. So your
approach triggers 1+n selects instead of 1 select for all required
objects at once.
Sven
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Generics
hey,
why does the panel is not using generics for type safety?
regards
--
Jetzt kostenlos herunterladen: Internet Explorer 8 und Mozilla Firefox 3 -
sicherer, schneller und einfacher! http://portal.gmx.net/de/go/atbrowser
What's the meaning you want to attach to the missing generic parameter?
Best,
Ernesto
On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 12:23 PM, Kurt Zitze g...@gmx.net wrote:
hey,
why does the panel is not using generics for type safety?
regards
--
Jetzt kostenlos herunterladen: Internet Explorer 8 und Mozilla
i want the getModelObject() (which is in fact the getDefaultModelObject()) to
return the actual type that i dont need to do unchecked casts. i'm just
wondering, now that everything uses generics, why does the panel do not use
generics? just want to understand the reason behind this.
regards
garz
: garz [mailto:g...@gmx.net]
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 9. September 2009 13:24
An: users@wicket.apache.org
Betreff: Re: Panel not using generics
i want the getModelObject() (which is in fact the getDefaultModelObject()) to
return the actual type that i dont need to do unchecked casts. i'm just
wondering
unchecked casts. i'm just
wondering, now that everything uses generics, why does the panel do not use
generics? just want to understand the reason behind this.
regards
garz
reiern70 wrote:
What's the meaning you want to attach to the missing generic parameter?
Best,
Ernesto
On Wed, Sep
: Wednesday, September 09, 2009 7:58 AM
To: users@wicket.apache.org
Subject: Re: Panel not using generics
The main point I could object is that you might have panels that are not
associated to a model... and then you will still have to pass a model
object type to avoid unchecked warnings... I know I
not need to declare your variables with the
wildcards.
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 6:31 PM, Cristi Manolecristiman...@gmail.com wrote:
declaration is not the problem. from what i remember from generics (I might
be wrong), you're not allowed to instantiate generically. you have to tell
the compiler
Manolecristiman...@gmail.com wrote:
declaration is not the problem. from what i remember from generics (I might
be wrong), you're not allowed to instantiate generically. you have to tell
the compiler exactly what type you want. at runtime it has no idea about
generics.
On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 12:41 AM
do not need to declare your variables with the
wildcards.
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 6:31 PM, Cristi Manolecristiman...@gmail.com
wrote:
declaration is not the problem. from what i remember from generics (I might
be wrong), you're not allowed to instantiate generically. you have to
tell
On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 8:13 AM, Martin
Makundimartin.maku...@koodaripalvelut.com wrote:
Hi!
Yes.. this is true but not ideally consistent. More consistent would be
DropDownChoice? extends BaseClass dropDown = new DropDownChoice?
extends BaseClass(id);
You can't instantiate with a wildcard
DropDownChoice? extends BaseClass dropDown = new DropDownChoice?
extends BaseClass(id);
You can't instantiate with a wildcard type. That's not allowed by the
Java language.
Ah yes... I'm getting confused myself. So the real problem is that I
instantiate new DropDownChoiceBaseClass(id) but
On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 9:25 AM, Martin
Makundimartin.maku...@koodaripalvelut.com wrote:
DropDownChoice? extends BaseClass dropDown = new DropDownChoice?
extends BaseClass(id);
You can't instantiate with a wildcard type. That's not allowed by the
Java language.
Ah yes... I'm getting
OK, my own fault:
DropDownChoice? extends BaseClass ps = new
DropDownChoiceBaseClass() so the variable type spoils it.
**
Martin
2009/6/13 James Carman jcar...@carmanconsulting.com:
On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 9:25 AM, Martin
Makundimartin.maku...@koodaripalvelut.com wrote:
DropDownChoice?
I have casting problem:
dropDown = new DropDownChoice? extends BaseClass(, new
ChoiceRendererBaseClass(...));
dropDown.getChoiceRenderer().getDisplayValue(dropDown.getModelObject());
-- DOES NOT COMPILE
Is this a wicket bug or bug in me?
**
Martin
new DropDownChoiceBaseClass ?
-igor
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 6:06 AM, Martin
Makundimartin.maku...@koodaripalvelut.com wrote:
I have casting problem:
dropDown = new DropDownChoice? extends BaseClass(, new
ChoiceRendererBaseClass(...));
new DropDownChoiceBaseClass ?
Maybe ...
**
Martin
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 6:06 AM, Martin
Makundimartin.maku...@koodaripalvelut.com wrote:
I have casting problem:
dropDown = new DropDownChoice? extends BaseClass(, new
ChoiceRendererBaseClass(...));
Just because the constructor is declared that way (with the ?) doesn't mean
you have to declare your variables that way.
On Jun 12, 2009 4:43 PM, Martin Makundi
martin.maku...@koodaripalvelut.com wrote:
new DropDownChoiceBaseClass ?
Maybe ...
**
Martin
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 6:06 AM,
declaration is not the problem. from what i remember from generics (I might
be wrong), you're not allowed to instantiate generically. you have to tell
the compiler exactly what type you want. at runtime it has no idea about
generics.
On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 12:41 AM, James Carman
ja
But, the compiler only knows what you're allowed to do by the type of
the variable. You do not need to declare your variables with the
wildcards.
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 6:31 PM, Cristi Manolecristiman...@gmail.com wrote:
declaration is not the problem. from what i remember from generics (I
Hi,
I am still very very new to Java and Wicket of course too,
so excuse me if this is a dumb question.
I swiched my project to Wicket 1.4-rc4 now and got all these
wonderful warnings about the Raw types of the components
in my sources.
Are there any examples that highlight the handling of
the
On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 6:54 AM, Frank Tegtmeyer
frank.tegtme...@online-systemhaus.com wrote:
Hi,
I am still very very new to Java and Wicket of course too,
so excuse me if this is a dumb question.
I swiched my project to Wicket 1.4-rc4 now and got all these
wonderful warnings about the Raw
according to this post;
http://tinyurl.com/qlghyf
the inmethod grid it he wicketstuff modules was to get generics.
I'm finding the missing generics a real pain in the behind but I also
have a recent checkout of the 1.4-SNAPSHOT of wicketstuff, and it does
not yet have generics.
Does
was to get generics.
I'm finding the missing generics a real pain in the behind but I also have a
recent checkout of the 1.4-SNAPSHOT of wicketstuff, and it does not yet have
generics.
Does anyone know if this component has been abandoned or not?
If I have to I'll go an add the generics myself
, May 8, 2009 at 11:49 PM, Brill Pappin br...@pappin.ca wrote:
according to this post;
http://tinyurl.com/qlghyf
the inmethod grid it he wicketstuff modules was to get generics.
I'm finding the missing generics a real pain in the behind but I also have a
recent checkout of the 1.4-SNAPSHOT
That would be great!
If you need an area to focus on, it's the generics that type things
like getSelectedItems() etc. and some of the other common overrides.
- Brill Pappin
On 8-May-09, at 5:57 PM, Matej Knopp wrote:
Found the patch, will assign it to jira issue. And possibly apply
http://www.nabble.com/generics-to18083910.html#a18083910 .
But I bit confused.
As I understand, if I have a bean that will be used in a
CompoundPropertyModel, then I should put this as the T parameter, right?
If I don't use a special model or a type in that model, what should I put?
'Object'?
It's
This is not really Wicket related, but I don't quite know where else to
ask this. The question is: why won't this compile?
// I define a model
IModelListSubgenre subgenreModel = new
AbstractReadOnlyModelListSubgenre() {
...
}
// Here I try to use the model
FieldSwitchPanel subgenrefield =
Hi Linda,
You are assuming that
IModelListSubgenre
is a subtype of
IModelList? extends DomainObject
In java this is not the case (even if Subgenre extends DomainObject).
You'll need an explicit cast to make this work:
IModelList? extends DomainObject castedModel =
(IModelList?
1 - 100 of 635 matches
Mail list logo
