I don't care much for getValue() because to me the word "value" suggests
"atomic value" (or even "atomic constant") -- which is not the general
case.

At first I thought of recommending getBusinessObject() to distinguish
the result from the framework-oriented model classes, but that could be
confusing if it were common practices to embed wicket models inside of
wicket models (the Decorator pattern).  If that's they case, I would
deprecate getModelObject() and replace it with getUnwrappedModel().

(Obviously, wicket documentation must somewhere explain the necessity of
_wrapping_ business objects in Wicket model classes to be accessed by
wicket components.  Once that process is understood, multiple levels of
wrapping should not be too difficult to understand.)


-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jonathan
Locke
Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 11:35 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Wicket-user] VOTE: IModel and 'model object' name change



yeah.  i agree.  if we did anything it would be better to change IModel
as i said, but then just deprecate getModelObject() and add a preferred
version as
getModelValue() as johan suggested.  this would only break code that
directly uses IModel (a more limited number of users).


Eelco Hillenius wrote:
> 
> I voted -1, but here is my opinion about the change proper.
> 
>> public interface IModel<V> extends IDetachable
>> {
>>   V getValue();
>>   void setValue(V value);
>> }
> 
> This would be for the better imo, though I don't hate the original
> getObject *that* much. It's just what you are used to and I think
> documentation on how models should be used is a lot more important.
> 
> 
>> we would also change getModelObject() to getValue() as well as any
other
>> related methods like getModelObjectAsString() to getValueAsString()
(or
>> valueAsString() if preferred).  there might be naming conflicts
somewhere
>> or
>> other problems, but i don't know of any offhand.
> 
> Tbh, I actually don't think Component#getValue is for the better. I
> think Component#getModelObject is way clearer than Component#getValue.
> In the end I think both value and object are ambiguous, and this
> should be fixed by documentation and examples.
> 
> Btw, If there is *anything* I never liked about the whole model
> business, it is the fact that Component has methods to get the model
> value in the first place (getModelObject etc).
> 
> The indirection that IModel provides is something to get used to. It
> is one of the places where we traded clarity and simplicity for
> flexibility. I think it'll be hard to grasp for newbies no matter the
> naming, so the better our documentation and examples are, the quicker
> they will be able to wrap their head around it.
> 
> Eelco
> 
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
> Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
> Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to
share
> your
> opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
>
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDE
V
> _______________________________________________
> Wicket-user mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
> 
> 

-- 
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/revising-the-%22Working-with-Wicket-models%22-page
-tf3016921.html#a8526349
Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share
your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDE
V
_______________________________________________
Wicket-user mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
Wicket-user mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user

Reply via email to