On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 5:22 PM, Jan Kriesten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi, > >> I'm not sure I like where this discussion is going. I don't see anyone >> having any particular objections against current state. > > @matej_k: > > ugh - you should count again... if I counted right, most of the responses > yet prefer 'Component' /not/ being touched by generics.
Question is, how many of those users actually use generified wicket on day-to-day basis. -Matej > >> +1, I agree. I think this discussion might be counter-productive if >> folks who aren't using the generified versions are voting. > > @jwcarman: > > There is an issue with generics on components which is leading into a big > mess - and as far as I can see, many objections are especially on that > topic! It might not be Wicket's fault, though, it might be a language > problem (i.e. Java's to blame). > > But IMHO putting generics on Component is a bad design, since it per se > touches all of Wicket's Components without urgent need. Boilerplate over and > over. If I look at my components and libraries (and yes, i have tried out > 1.4!) - I have at most 30% of my components containing a Model! > > Best regards, --- Jan. > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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]
