Re: users, please give us your opinion: what is your take on generics with Wicket

[Sebastiaan van Erk]

A raw type is a parameterized type in which the type parameters are not filled in, i.e., new HashMap() (instead of new HashMap<String, Integer>()).

Regards,
Sebastiaan

Brill Pappin wrote:

Just try to return one of your old (non-generified) HomePage.class classes (i.e., HomePage extends WebPage instead of HomePage extends WebPage<Void>) in your WebApplication's getHomePage() method, and you will see that it does not compile.

I'm likely missing something here, but why would you want to return
something other than a *Page object? Wouldn't that cause some issues with
the application?

Maybe I don't understand what you mean by "raw type".

- Brill Pappin

-----Original Message-----

From: Sebastiaan van Erk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, June 02, 2008 11:53 AM

To: users@wicket.apache.org
Subject: Re: users, please give us your opinion: what is your take on
generics with Wicket

James Carman wrote:

I'm adding a "Gotchas" section now.

Your pallete gotcha seems more like a JIRA to me. :-) It's not really about
generics in general, but about a specific choice in 1 component (which
really seems incorrect to me, i.e., PECS).

One of the gotcha's I think is the getHomePage() signature...

        public abstract Class<? extends Page<?>> getHomePage();

This breaks raw types (you can't return raw home page).

I don't see any way out of this one without making the getHomePage()
signature incorrect (i.e., you can't make it a generic method, which was


Regards,
Sebastiaan

used to solve the problem where a method argument had the type Class<? extends Page<?>>).

On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 11:13 AM, Hoover, William <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

wrote:

Sounds like a good idea... Are you going to create it?

-----Original Message-----

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

On Behalf Of James Carman
Sent: Monday, June 02, 2008 11:06 AM
To: users@wicket.apache.org





wrote:

Subject: Re: users, please give us your opinion: what is your take on generics with Wicket Why don't we use the Wiki page to list our *specific* "gotchas" we encounter and try to come up with a solution for them. My guess is that we can do so. On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 11:03 AM, Hoover, William <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

+1


-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of James Carman
Sent: Monday, June 02, 2008 10:56 AM
To: users@wicket.apache.org


On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 10:45 AM, Matej Knopp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

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. Subject: Re: users, please give us your opinion: what is your take on generics with Wicket

I'm not sure I like where this discussion is going. I don't see anyone having any particular objections against current state. I think before we even think of (partially) reverting generics we have to discuss what's wrong (except the verbosity of course, but that's not something we can really do about) with current state. I use wicket with generics daily and I don't see any particular show stopper so far.

+1, I agree.  I think this discussion might be counter-productive if
folks who aren't using the generified versions are voting.

--------------------------------------------------------------------
- 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]



---------------------------------------------------------------------
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]

smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature