ok, just committed with Binding2 / PropertyConduit2 keeping backwards compatibility in tact.
On 19 May 2014 19:02, Lance Java <lance.j...@googlemail.com> wrote: > I can implement like that if others agree. I just hate instanceof littered > around the place. > > It also brings up the possibility of third parties wrapping a Binding2 > with a Binding and losing functionality. I'd prefer a compilation error > myself. > On 19 May 2014 17:46, "Thiago H de Paula Figueiredo" <thiag...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> On Mon, 19 May 2014 13:04:55 -0300, Lance Java <lance.j...@googlemail.com> >> wrote: >> >> I guess my question is, is it worth adding / maintaining Binding2 and >>> PropertyConduit2 and all the type checking / adapting. >>> >>> Or are we happy to add the methods to the public API given its a no >>> brainer to implement getGenericType() to return getType() >>> >> >> Considering we've dealt with this kind of scenario using the first option >> (Binding2 and PropertyConduit2), I'd go with it. I guess just a handful of >> places would need to be adapted. >> >> -- >> Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo >> Tapestry, Java and Hibernate consultant and developer >> http://machina.com.br >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tapestry.apache.org >> >>
