Yes, but the issue I encountered that wicket first call getConverter method, yet not using what was returned as supposed to be. Class based converter is a way to write one default converter for one class, but if a special converter is provided for a subset of that class, then the special convert should be used
>yes, since the converter interface now has > >convertToObject(String value); >convertToString(Object value); > >not just a single convertTo(Object object, Class type) > >it makes it rather explicit that the converter is meant to convert >something to a string and back...no? > >-igor > > >On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 11:35 AM, Eelco Hillenius ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On Sun, Mar 9, 2008 at 9:45 AM, Igor Vaynberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >wrote: >> >> > i thought we agreed converters were type converters... >> >> Did we? :-) >> >> Eelco >> >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
