+0 I can see both sides of the equation... I like the current api
because it makes explicit that the input conversion can (will) fail.
Not sure if just declaring the checked exception in the constructor of
a page is just as good. ie.
class MyPage extends WebPage {
MyPage(PageParameters pars) throws StringValueConversionException {
// ... do something with the pars.
}
}
On 12/1/06, Eelco Hillenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Can we have more votes please devs?
Eelco
On 12/1/06, Johan Compagner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> nowadays i hate checked exceptions..
>
> +1
>
> johan
>
>
> On 12/1/06, Eelco Hillenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > +1
> >
> > Eelco
> >
> >
> > On 11/30/06, Nick Heudecker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Here's the background on this vote:
> > >
> >
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg09093.html
> > >
> >
http://www.mail-archive.com/wicket-develop%40lists.sourceforge.net/msg08690.html
> > >
> > > I'd like to open it up to a formal vote, even though I'm not a
> > committer.
> > >
> > > +1 (Non-Binding)
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
--
<a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/vote_for/wicket";>Vote</a>
for <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/stuff/wicket";>Wicket</a>
at the <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/";>Best Stuff in
the World!</a>
