Well, the compiler will give you an error when you do: final String foo = "Foo";
foo = "Bar"; The difference is in naming: add() currently does exactly what it says. addOrReplace does also exactly what it says. Having clear meaningful names is a good thing to have. Deprecating add in favor of addOrReplace() would have a different effect: more verbose (but meaningful) code... Martijn On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 2:40 PM, Korbinian Bachl - privat <korbinian.ba...@whiskyworld.de> wrote: > Hi, > > I don't use jRebel but the differentiation of the add and addOrReplace > method is something that I still don't understand what it's good for. > > Actually if you do in java: > > String foo; > > foo = new String("world"); > > no one ever would think about throwing an error because one does > > foo = new String("no World"); later on > > This add(new Label("foo","message")); should behave IMHO the same as > overwriting objects (and here we just put a new object to the add method) is > just natural in java as everyone of us does it every day. > > IMHO: make addOrReplace deprecated in next 1.4 release and give add the same > behaviour as current addOrReplace; in 1.5 addOrReplace can be stripped > completely; > > my 2 cents - now flame on me :) > > > > Am 18.11.10 14:25, schrieb Martijn Dashorst: >> >> Relaxing the add() method has been proposed before (by Eelco). It is >> not something new, and if it helps people using jrebel to improve >> their productivity, that would be a great side effect. >> >> The workaround is indeed to go back to a different page and do the >> appropriate clicks again. >> >> Martijn > -- Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com