then our users have to suppress warnings in their code, which is
unacceptable at least to me. the whole generics thing turned out to be
quiet a lot crappier then i thought it would.
-igor
On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 12:48 PM, Johan Compagner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> yes then all the call to that method must be of a generic type.
> cant be raw
>
> i dont know what are we going to do in wicket i think we should decide it
> should we just where we dont care about generic delete/not use the <?> and
> then
> supresswarning?
>
> johan
>
>
> On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 9:45 PM, Igor Vaynberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
>> so i just implemented IAuthorizationStrategy and on this line in my class:
>>
>> public boolean isInstantiationAuthorized(Class< ? extends Component>
>> componentClass)
>>
>> i get: Component is a raw type. References to generic type
>> Component<T> should be parameterized
>>
>> so that means we have to change our sig to <? extends Component<?>>
>> but then we are back to the problem described in this thread.
>>
>> generics suck.
>>
>> -igor
>>
>> On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 12:12 AM, Johan Compagner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>> > I dont think that user gets a warning if a param is of raw type. But
>> > we have a warning there.
>> > The problem is that for example MarkupContainer.add(Component) or
>> > IVisitor.visit(Component) i dont care what component is put in
>> > generified or not.
>> > In add it really doesnt matter because we dont do anything with it.
>> > With visitor it is different because the user could use it inside the
>> > method. But it should be useable without warnings for generified and
>> > none generfied components..
>> >
>> >
>> > On 5/14/08, Igor Vaynberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> if we have a signature that accepts a raw type, will that also cause a
>> >> warning in user's code?
>> >>
>> >> also having those suppress annotations practically _everywhere_ will be
>> >> annoying
>> >>
>> >> -igor
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 11:56 PM, Johan Compagner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >
>> >> wrote:
>> >> > I dont care, because i cant do any thing with the ? The only thing it
>> >> > enforces is that it must now be a generic class which is annoying.
>> Not
>> >> > to mention that in that area eclipse and javac accept different
>> >> > things....
>> >> >
>> >> > So or we in wicket dont use <?> any where and have supress warning
>> >> > everywhere for that or we do use it and then suddenly it is in my
>> eyes
>> >> > restricted to much.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > On 5/14/08, Sebastiaan van Erk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> > > Johan Compagner wrote:
>> >> > > > yes thats the reason
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > you are calling the method add with a generified component but
>> that
>> >> > > > container itself is not generified
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > i dont like this about generics expecially the onces like this:
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > add(MarkupContainer<?> container)
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > then suddenly a none generified component cant be added...
>> >> > > > thats really stupid <?> should mean anything.. including none
>> >> generics
>> >> > >
>> >> > > No, that's not correct. For example, List<?> is much more
>> restrictive
>> >> > > than a raw List (which is a List<Object>). To a raw list you can
>> add an
>> >> > > instance of any type whatever, i.e., list.add(new Object()). But in
>> >> > > List<?> the ? is a wildcard which says it could be any type there,
>> >> i.e.,
>> >> > > it could be a List<Integer>. But you can't add a new Object() to a
>> >> > > List<Integer>!
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Thus MarkupContainer<?> means "MarkupContainer parameterized by
>> some
>> >> > > unknown type", and *not* MarkupContainer parameterized by Object,
>> which
>> >> > > is what the raw type means.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Regards,
>> >> > > Sebastiaan
>> >> > >
>> >> > > > johan
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 5:55 PM, Stefan Simik
>> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> >> > > > wrote:
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > >> I have one idea,
>> >> > > >>
>> >> > > >> the reason of the warnigs is, that parent of AjaxPagingNavigator
>> is
>> >> > > >> PagingNavigator,
>> >> > > >> which has parent Panel ---> that is not parameterized.
>> >> > > >>
>> >> > > >> The same problem is with LoopItem, which extends the
>> >> > > >> WebMarkupContainer ---> that is not parameterized.
>> >> > > >>
>> >> > > >> ? could this be the reason ?
>> >> > > >>
>> >> > > >>
>> >> > > >>
>> >> > > >>
>> >> > > >>
>> >> > > >>
>> >> > > >> Stefan Simik wrote:
>> >> > > >>> Mhmm, it is meaningful ;) I will know in future, thx
>> >> > > >>>
>> >> > > >>> One of the last occuring warning is, when working with
>> >> > > >>> MarkupContainer#add(...) or #addOrReplace(...) method.
>> >> > > >>>
>> >> > > >>> Example: I have a simple AjaxPagingNavigator, to which I add a
>> >> simple
>> >> > > >>> ListView
>> >> > > >>>
>> >> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> > > >>> ListView<Integer> menu = new ListView<Integer>("id", numbers){
>> >> > > >>> //....populate metods
>> >> > > >>> }
>> >> > > >>> add(menu); //warning here
>> >> > > >>>
>> >> > > >>> The warning says:
>> >> > > >>> "Type safety: The method add(Component...) belongs to the raw
>> type
>> >> > > >>> MarkupContainer.
>> >> > > >>> References to generic type MarkupContainer<T> should be
>> >> parameterized"
>> >> > > >>>
>> >> > > >>> I cannot find out, what's the warning reason, because ListView
>> self
>> >> is
>> >> > > >>> parameterized.
>> >> > > >>>
>> >> > > >>>
>> >> > > >> --
>> >> > > >> View this message in context:
>> >> > > >>
>> >> > >
>> >>
>> http://www.nabble.com/Using-generics-with-some-non-generic-classes-in-Wicket-tp17208928p17212015.html
>> >> > > >> Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>> >> > > >>
>> >> > > >>
>> >> > > >>
>> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> > > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >> > > >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >> > > >>
>> >> > > >>
>> >> > > >
>> >> > >
>> >> >
>> >> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >> > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >
>> >
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
