<igor.vaynberg <at> gmail.com> writes: > you say you are concerned with abuse, but what would this subclass > solve? those who want to abuse can then just use privatefieldmodel to > do so.
No. It is designed to work with cases like your NamePanel. That kind of use is not an abuse (far from it). It would be an abuse only if it was used with a UserPanel that displayed a User object passed in for editing. > if you are really concerned with abuse then dont use property models > at all - they are just a shortcut to save typing. I've never said saving typing is always bad. As I said in another post, saving typing at the cost of static type checking sometimes is a justified tradeoff (eg, regex). Just that I've never seen that being done at the cost of exposing implementation details. Therefore, I don't see the use of PropertyModel as an abuse. I think it is perfectly justifiable example of saving typing at the cost of static type checking. > the other problem is that its a bit late to make the change. its been > in there since before beta 1, and introducing this new subclass will > silently break people's code. This is fine and acceptable. What I'd like to find out is what we should tell people about this feature: 1) You should always use it. 2) You shouldn't use it as it is going to be deprecated. 3) You should use it only in cases like your NamePanel. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ _______________________________________________ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user