On Tue, 9 Nov 2010 10:20:12 +0200 Martin Makundi <martin.maku...@koodaripalvelut.com> wrote:
> > I frankly don't see any way to have this "auto-hierarchy" stuff > > without getting lots of unnecessary ambiguity and sources of bugs. I > > totally agree with what Eelco wrote below, and what someone else > > said about the Python way of having only *one* way to do *one* > > thing. > > Would you be happy if there was an application level configuration > switch: > > getMarkupSettings().setAllowComponentAutoHierarchy(true); Possibly. I'd rather not have the unnecessary complexity of this feature at all though. I certainly wouldn't want to support it if I was a wicket developer :-) > Which is default false? > > This way you can make sure nobody in YOUR project messes things up? I have new projects every now and then, and most of them are already underway when I get called in. Which is why I like toolkits that do not encourage sloppiness(*). Carl-Eric www.wicketbuch.de *) sloppiness != easy to write I'm all for static typing, since it saves me the work of checking the types. I'd like it to be more like Scala, which saves me the typing I have to do in Java, while still giving me the same guarantees. With your proposed config switch, you're basically giving up one of Wicket's guarantees, the one that the hierarchy is what it looks like in the code. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
