I usually think of them as read only as well, however why would you
presume read only?
they are pretty much exactly the same semantically and if I thought of
some cool trick I could do modifying the list, I'd hate to be
prevented from doing so simply because someone wanted to lock down an
API that didn't really need locking down.
I think the syntax doesn't really mean read only, and if the wicket
developers really want it to be read only, wrapping the list would be
the way to go.
I'm for the plain old <List<T>> because its simple and explicit...
<List<? extends T>> would be my next choice because it widens the scope.
- Brill
On 2-Mar-09, at 3:44 PM, James Carman wrote:
Aren't both the "choices" model in DDC and the actual model of
ListView supposed to be considered read-only (as far as the component
is concerned)? The DDC and ListView don't need to be able to alter
those models anyway, right? Perhaps my experience is just too
limited, but I don't think I've ever tried to do either one of your
usecases (I always consider them read-only).
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 3:24 PM, Igor Vaynberg
<[email protected]> wrote:
see WICKET-2126
-igor
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 12:19 PM, James Carman
<[email protected]> wrote:
I vote -0.99 on this (non-binding of course). I'd vote +1 to making
ListView accept List<? extends T> rather than making DDC less
flexible.
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 3:11 PM, Brill Pappin <[email protected]>
wrote:
Ok, as suggested, here is the thread, and the first vote.
+1
for making the generic definition the same for all list type
components.
FYI - you can also "vote" in the issue I just created at (which
might
actually be a better place to vote):
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-2137
- Brill
On 28-Feb-09, at 5:18 PM, Jeremy Thomerson wrote:
Perhaps start a vote thread, with the subject something like:
"VOTE:
Remove
? extends from constructor of DropDownChoice".
I'd be +1 non-binding
--
Jeremy Thomerson
http://www.wickettraining.com
On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 3:33 PM, Brill Pappin <[email protected]>
wrote:
I'm of the don't widen it camp anyway :)
So how do I go about gathering support for having the
DropDownChoice work
with the models the way everything else does?
- Brill
On 28-Feb-09, at 1:42 AM, Igor Vaynberg wrote:
yes, the choice was intentional. personally i do not care if it
is <T>
all the way, some users complained so we widened it on the
choices
model, we cannot widen it on the main model.
-igor
On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 8:51 PM, Brill Pappin
<[email protected]> wrote:
I see... but this would i think because Bar "is a" Foo:
class Bar exends Foo {}
List<? extends Foo> list = ...
list.add(new Bar());
Anyway, what your saying is that the generics choice was
intentional?
- Brill
On 27-Feb-09, at 3:19 PM, Igor Vaynberg wrote:
list<? extends string> stings=...
strings.add("asd"); <== wont compile
-igor
On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 11:13 AM, Adriano dos Santos Fernandes
<[email protected]> wrote:
What do you mean with "read only" here?
Adriano
Igor Vaynberg escreveu:
<? extends Foo> collections are read only, it would be too
inconvenient to make the model collection read only :)
-igor
On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 8:34 PM, Jeremy Thomerson
<[email protected]> wrote:
This is what I was commenting on last week on the list
(or earlier
this
week). One expects List<? extends Foo> while the other
expects
List<Foo>.
I'm not fully convinced yet that the "? extends" is the
better
option.
Either way, I think they should be the same.
--
Jeremy Thomerson
http://www.wickettraining.com
On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 8:27 PM, Brill Pappin <[email protected]
>
wrote:
Roughly what I'm doing is:
class TypeA{}
class TypeAModel extends LoadableDetachableModel<
List<TypeA>> {
public List<TypeA> load(){
... do the load ...
return ...
}
}
TypeAModel model = new TypeAModel();
DropDownChoice< TypeA> ddc = new
DropDownChoice<TypeA>("id", model
);
which gets complained about... in this case the generic
def is
DropDownChoice<List<? extends T>>
I think the problem is that the generic def of the class
should
actually
be
DropDownChoice<List<T>> because you are already
identifying the
type
when
you create a new instance.
Now... my generics are a bit hazy at this level, because
I can
understand
why it was done that way... does anyone with more generics
experience
know
what it should be? Is this a bug that needs filing?
- Brill
On 26-Feb-09, at 6:03 PM, Kaspar Fischer wrote:
On 26.02.2009, at 22:52, Brill Pappin wrote:
For some reason the DropDownChoice component doesn't
have the
same
generics as ListView and it will not accept a model that
listview
will,
despite its saying that it will accept an IModel.
Is anyone else having that sort of trouble with
DropDownChoice?
- Brill
Can you give us more information on what exactly is not
working
for
you?
DropDownChoice indeed does accept a model, see for
instance the
example
in
the class description at
http://wicket.apache.org/docs/1.4/org/apache/wicket/markup/html/form/DropDownChoice.html
This works for me.
Kaspar
--
<!-- HTML: -->
<select wicket:id="site">
<option>site 1</option>
<option>site 2</option>
</select>
<ul>
<li wicket:id="site2"><wicket:container
wicket:id="sitename"/></li>
</ul>
// Code
List SITES = Arrays.asList(new String[] {
"The Server Side", "Java Lobby", "Java.Net"
});
form.add(new DropDownChoice("site", SITES));
form.add(new ListView("site2", SITES)
{
@Override
protected void populateItem(ListItem item)
{
item.add(new Label("sitename", item.getModel()));
}
});
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-
[email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
? extends
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: users-
[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]
es, the choice
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
