the fact remains that there are components that are sometimes used with a model and sometimes without one. as it is we only generify components that we *think* are most likely to be used with a model, this is why we spent many an hour backing out generics from Component.
it is too bad that java does not have a way to default to a type if one is not specified, but that is java's limitation. -igor On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 8:46 AM, Jan Kriesten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi Igor, > >> you are against generics completely. but they are going to happen. the >> way they are now is not perfect, in 1.5 we will try to move them to a >> better place, but like it or not they are here to stay. > > huh - hell, no, I'm not against generics at all. Where do you get that from? > I'm > against generics on Components which are not FormComponents (or ListViews)! > > I'm using Wicket together with Scala and other than with Java, I can't just > drop > the generics attributes (and live with the warnings). And the <Void> is > really a > hell of a generic... > > Generics on Models are what is needed and if your vision to decouple models > from > the component and use introspection/reflection to support them comes true I'd > be > quite happy (and could use Scala's mixin-feature to have my model > functionality > on the components). > > 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]
