I used M2 and had no problem with it. When I heard talk about "decoupling" the components and the models, for M3, I thought that seemed a good idea.

Now I use M3. It works fine, but I think generics for components is implemented "upside down". I think M3 should have been M2 with generics "turned off" where it wasn't needed.

/Anders


Ned Collyer wrote:
I've just converted over a project.... to 1.4-m3 from m1.  I skipped m2
because of the drastic changes between 1, 2 and 3.

I must say, I think generics at a component level - when I initially started
using it felt like unneeded overhead - but it became more and more useful.

now that I've changed to 1.4-m3 - Many parts of the project start to feel
like unneeded cast soup - even if it is just reimplementing "getModel or
getModelObject" over and over.

It's a change that I found a bit hard to visualise the impact until I made
the switch.

I must say m1 generics felt more powerful and appropriate for all the
circumstances i've come across... with the exception of having to generify
things like Label.

Anyway,
Thats my feedback after the switch.



Timo Rantalaiho wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jul 2008, Stefan Lindner wrote:
Thank you all for your work on wicket! Maybe we can see Wicket 1.4.0
final in the near future?
Thanks for the feedback and the thanks!

There are still 30+ open issues for 1.4

https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&&pid=12310561&fixfor=12313295&resolution=-1&sorter/field=issuekey&sorter/order=DESC

and besides those, probably many places where raw versions of generic types are used and which should be fixed. So I wouldn't hold my breath :)

Best wishes,
Timo

--
Timo Rantalaiho Reaktor Innovations Oy <URL: http://www.ri.fi/ >

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

Reply via email to