Agreed. I don't see a problem with having to type Link<Void> or Page<Void> instead of Link/Page. That's simply the way that generics are implemented in Java. Are there places in the API where an end user would have to type something like Class<? extends Page<? extends IModel<T>>>? That way madness lies, however I haven't seen anything like that in 1.4M1 (I'll let you know about M2 later today).
So unless I'm missing something pretty beafy, which I don't see here: http://cwiki.apache.org/WICKET/generics.html I just don't see the problem with the current direction. Cheers, Scott On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 8:03 AM, Hoover, William <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > +1 > I would like to see what the major issues are as to why people are > rejecting model/component generics. None that I have seen so far are > that convincing- especially the complaints of verbosity. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
