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 turn out in the "[wicket 1.5] url handling refactor preview" which is many orders of magnitude more important but requires someone to actually spend 10-20 minutes looking and understanding some code. -igor On Sun, Oct 4, 2009 at 3:14 PM, Eelco Hillenius <eelco.hillen...@gmail.com> wrote: > I just want to get off my chest that it is amazing to me we all make > such a big deal out of that "I" being there. It's been there forever, > and with previous discussions we always concluded to leave it in > there. I never liked the code format we're using (curly braces on the > next line), but heck even though Wicket is the only project I've ever > worked on (as far as I can remember) where I used that, it's not > something to lose sleep over. Same with the I, I like it, but I'd be > fine with any alternative. More problematic to me is that we're going > to break a lot of code - including code printed on dead trees - over > it while there is absolutely no benefit other than a superficial one, > and as you can see from the replies in the thread, it's not even > universally thought of as better. And I think that some are a bit too > quick to trivialize that. Breaks, even little ones are annoying and > imho only justifyable when there's a clear benefit to doing that. But > this is plain nitpicking to me. > > I wouldn't give this a blocking vote, even if I had been more active > in the last year, but I'd like to ask everyone to not take even little > API breaks too lightly. > > Eelco >
