Interface for Tree State? (wicket-extensions)

[Rob Audenaerde <ro...@gmail.com>]

Hi devs,

(I hope this is the correct mailing list for questions on development of
wicket-extensions as well)?

I'm currently working on a Wicket TableTree, which is backed by my own
tree.

I have to make sure I have a ITreeProvider<T>, which is a nice interface,
and provide a IModel<Set<T>>, which is a set.

The tree implementation does not use all methods on the Set<T>, so I think
it would be nice if there is an interface ITreeState in the new Tree
implementation (which could basically be a subset of the Set methods)

There was one in the old implementation, but that one is deprecated.

Is there a reason there is no ITreeState in the new Tree implementation?

-Rob

Re: Interface for Tree State? (wicket-extensions)

[Sven Meier <sv...@meiers.net>]

Hi,

the old tree implementation kept much more information in its 
ITreeState: expansion, selection, multiple/single selection and a listener.
Now it just needs something with set semantics. Adding an additional 
interface would make it harder for those developers who already have a 
set to bind their tree to.
Unfortunately Java's Set interface is bloated with so many methods :(.

Regards
Sven


On 28.01.2015 09:29, Rob Audenaerde wrote:
> Hi devs,
>
> (I hope this is the correct mailing list for questions on development of
> wicket-extensions as well)?
>
> I'm currently working on a Wicket TableTree, which is backed by my own
> tree.
>
> I have to make sure I have a ITreeProvider<T>, which is a nice interface,
> and provide a IModel<Set<T>>, which is a set.
>
> The tree implementation does not use all methods on the Set<T>, so I think
> it would be nice if there is an interface ITreeState in the new Tree
> implementation (which could basically be a subset of the Set methods)
>
> There was one in the old implementation, but that one is deprecated.
>
> Is there a reason there is no ITreeState in the new Tree implementation?
>
> -Rob
>