like i said, i dont mind removing the default slot if we add nice automatic detachment for fields.
-igor On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 12:23 PM, Eelco Hillenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 11:48 AM, Igor Vaynberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> i dont think it exposes anything, or that anything is flawed. the >> component provides a slot for a default model - it is there totally >> out of convinience. i think what is flawed here is that we tied the >> two types via generics. > > It depends on how you phrase things. It is a fact that currently > models and components are tightly bound because of 'getModelObject'. > > The main issue is that with 1.3 you can simply omit the model, whereas > with generified components the choice to not use a model is explicit > (whether you use void, or an annotation to ignore warnings). Very > annoying if you ask me, and it triggered me to think that this is > another hint that the one-one relationship between components and > models like we have now is somewhat flawed. I'm not saying it totally > stinks and that we should get rid of it tomorrow, just that it is > something we might rethink. You know I'm a fan of rethinking stuff ;-) > > 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]
