wicket-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From James Carman <jcar...@carmanconsulting.com>
Subject Re: taking the I out of Interface
Date Sat, 03 Oct 2009 12:37:52 GMT
For the record, I'm -1 also (non-binding of course).  We have to be
careful here.  Tapestry got a bad reputation for changing things way
too much between major revisions and leaving their users out in the
cold.  It's one of the reasons I'm in the "Wicket World" these days.
By no means do I want to stifle innovation or anything, but breaking
compatibility should come with a rather big value-add.  In this case,
I agree that the "I" is ugly and I actually hate it, but how much is
it actually going to improve a Wicket user's day-to-day coding with
Wicket.  Is it going to save hundreds of lines of code?  Is it going
to save 20 minutes of development time per day?

On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 5:02 AM, Matej Knopp <matej.knopp@gmail.com> wrote:
> Anyhow, this doesn't look like lot of people are in favor of dropping
> I. In that case we should make sure that *all* interfaces in 1.5 are
> prefixed in I. If we go the (imho) ugly and non conventional way then
> we should at least be consistent.
> -Matej
> On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 12:28 AM, 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