i suppose we should start naming all our abstract classes with an A, so maybe AListView, nice to know its abstract and you have to implement something just by looking at the class name :)
personally when i am looking for a requestcycleprocessor something its a lot easier to type in RequestCycleProcessor into the ide and not have to guess if there is an I in the front. -igor On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 4:55 PM, Ryan Gravener <r...@ryangravener.com> wrote: > -1 It's nice to know what is an interface by seeing the I. Also for > IDEs its easier to find the class I'm looking for. > > > Ryan Gravener > http://bit.ly/no_word_docs > > > > On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 7:37 PM, Matej Knopp <matej.kn...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 1:29 AM, Altuğ B. Altıntaş <alt...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> what about upgrading projects from 1.4 to 1.5 ? >>> It breaks compatibility >> There will be other breaks. This is not a minor update. Breaks >> compatibility is hardly a valid argument here. We will break >> compatibility one way or another. But we will also provide migration >> path. Replacing Model with ObjectModel and then IModel with Model in >> code (just an made up example) is hardly a task that would prevent >> anyone from migrating application to 1.5. >> >> -Matej >> >>> >>> -1 >>> >>> Not: i am not a *committer* but loves wicket :) >>> >>> 2009/10/3 Matej Knopp <matej.kn...@gmail.com> >>> >>>> 1.5 is going to be neither source nor binary compatible. And I >>>> wouldn't say that consistency and conventions is not a reason. >>>> >>>> -Matej >>>> >>>> On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 1:14 AM, tetsuo <ronald.tet...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> > -1 >>>> > >>>> > It breaks compatibility for absolutely no reason. >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 7:45 PM, Johan Edstrom <seij...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> > >>>> >> +1 >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> On Oct 2, 2009, at 17:28, Igor Vaynberg <igor.vaynb...@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >> >>>> >> is it perhaps time to take the I out of our interface names? wicket >>>> >>> has been the only project i have ever worked on/used that follows this >>>> >>> convention, is it time for a change? >>>> >>> >>>> >>> this is not meant as a flamewar about which convention is teh >>>> >>> aw3s0m3st, simply a discussion of whether or not we should switch. >>>> >>> >>>> >>> -igor >>>> >>> >>>> >> >>>> > >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Altuğ. >>> >> >
