<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

Reply via email to