+1 for removing 'I'. I personally do like it but since this is what the
committers prefer than I'm fine.
-1 for renaming Model to anything else.
@Erik: it'd be interesting to be at a course of jWeekend where you'll
explain to the attendees Wicket consists of components, models, ... and
the basic
On Sun, Oct 4, 2009 at 3:03 PM, Erik van Oosten e.vanoos...@grons.nl wrote:
Hi,
* I am delighted that the root request mapper is also pluggable and that
request mappers can easily decorate other request mappers.
* In the new setup, am I correct in assuming that you can override the root
Should we rename IModel to Model we would also have to rename Model to
something. ObjectModel sounds like a really good name to me because it
says what it does. Holds single object.
Locator sounds really weird. I think renaming Model to Locator would
be hell lot more confusing than renaming
El dom, 04-10-2009 a las 15:45 +0200, Matej Knopp escribió:
Should we rename IModel to Model we would also have to rename Model to
something. ObjectModel sounds like a really good name to me because it
says what it does. Holds single object.
Locator sounds really weird. I think renaming
So ObjectModel will hold a single object only? What about lists and
collections?
IMHO the Object.. prefix has no benefit.
Why not drop the Model class altogether?
Its static helper methods could be located in a new non-instantiable
class Models (note the trailing 's') because there's nothing
On Sun, Oct 4, 2009 at 5:47 PM, Sven Meier s...@meiers.net wrote:
So ObjectModel will hold a single object only? What about lists and
collections?
Are you serious? A collection is still one instance. It doesn't matter
how many references it holds.
-Matej
IMHO the Object.. prefix has no
On Sun, Oct 4, 2009 at 8:45 AM, Matej Knopp matej.kn...@gmail.com wrote:
Should we rename IModel to Model we would also have to rename Model to
something. ObjectModel sounds like a really good name to me because it
says what it does. Holds single object.
Locator sounds really weird. I think
+1 data proxy or model proxy or proxymodel or wrapper model
2009/10/4 Jeremy Thomerson jer...@wickettraining.com:
On Sun, Oct 4, 2009 at 8:45 AM, Matej Knopp matej.kn...@gmail.com wrote:
Should we rename IModel to Model we would also have to rename Model to
something. ObjectModel sounds like
Hi Matej,
I don't know how my suggestion is related to seriousness, you don't have
to question my Java 101.
I was specifically referring to your statement:
ObjectModel sounds like a really good name to me because it says what
it does.
Holds single object.
I thought you wanted to emphasize
ObjectModel to me says that it holds an object. a Person is an object,
so is a List or a Set...
-igor
On Sun, Oct 4, 2009 at 9:33 AM, Sven Meier s...@meiers.net wrote:
Hi Matej,
I don't know how my suggestion is related to seriousness, you don't have to
question my Java 101.
I was
Matej Knopp wrote:
On Sun, Oct 4, 2009 at 3:03 PM, Erik van Oosten e.vanoos...@grons.nl wrote:
* I am a bit confused about the RequestHandler interface. It contains
nothing to get the request's parameters. How is method
RequestMapper#map(RequestHandler) supposed to work then? I guess it will
Am 04.10.2009 um 20:33 schrieb Erik van Oosten:
Martin Grigorov wrote:
@Erik: it'd be interesting to be at a course of jWeekend where you'll
explain to the attendees Wicket consists of components,
models, ... and
the basic model is Locator (and all implementations end with
**Model).
I'll
On Sun, Oct 4, 2009 at 6:03 AM, Erik van Oosten e.vanoos...@grons.nl wrote:
* With all respect to the given code, good names are important and therefore
comments on names are important as well. A good name will deepen
understanding. I too find that overloading of these 2 method names is not
heh, dont confuse making such a big deal with an incredibly
low-entry barrier into this thread. posting your opinion here requires
nothing more than clicking the send button, and of course having an
opinion - which everyone always does.
compare the turn out in this thread to the incredibly low
14 matches
Mail list logo