wicket-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Stefan Lindner" <lind...@visionet.de>
Subject RE: taking the I out of Interface
Date Sat, 03 Oct 2009 06:03:38 GMT
I don't have a problem with breaking compatibility. Makeing a step forward and making things
better always leaves behind something. Mostly something not so good. I like the way wicket
names interfaces with I... and we followed this conventiun in our coding rules. But taking
a look at some of our wicket projects shows that we use only a few of Wicket's I... directly
- IModel (sure)
- ITab
- IColumn
- ILinkListener
- IUnauthorizedComponentInstantiationListener

That's nearly all. Only very few others and only one occurence per project.


-----Urspr√ľngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Igor Vaynberg [mailto:igor.vaynberg@gmail.com] 
Gesendet: Samstag, 3. Oktober 2009 03:03
An: dev@wicket.apache.org
Betreff: Re: taking the I out of Interface

for people who are going to say that this is going to break compatibility:

please look through your code and count the number of places where you
implement a wicket-specific interface directly. we would like to know
how often and what these interfaces are.



On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 3:28 PM, Igor Vaynberg <igor.vaynberg@gmail.com> wrote:
> is it perhaps time to take the I out of our interface names? wicket
> has been the only project i have ever worked on/used that follows this
> convention, is it time for a change?
> this is not meant as a flamewar about which convention is teh
> aw3s0m3st, simply a discussion of whether or not we should switch.
> -igor

View raw message