Peter Robinett pe...@bubblefoundry.com writes:
Hi all,
[...]
// Usage in boot.scala
val myJsScript = new JsScript(flot :: jquery.flot.selectable.js ::
Nil)
ResourceServer.allow(myJsScript.allowResource)
// Usage in a normal snippet
def mySnippet = {
head
{
Hi,
I'm about to start sprinkling the new logging code over some of Lift's
internals. But first, the logging backend needs configuring.
When the dust has settled and the new logging code is fully implemented,
this needs to happen in a client app:
1) Choose a logging backend and add the
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 7:36 AM, aw anth...@whitford.com wrote:
On Feb 24, 12:47 pm, Jeppe Nejsum Madsen je...@ingolfs.dk wrote:
We're currently using Rails migrations and I've been thinking if
putting migrations into the app is really the right approach? What
happens if migrations fail? It's
I'd opt in for something like:
LiftRules.logger = Log4J
or
LiftRule.logger = MyOwnLogger
Br's,
Marius
On Feb 25, 11:23 am, Jeppe Nejsum Madsen je...@ingolfs.dk wrote:
Hi,
I'm about to start sprinkling the new logging code over some of Lift's
internals. But first, the logging backend
+1
This fits with the idioms we already have. Although, so Lift doesn't carry a
default dependency it would probably need to be:
// default
LiftRules.logger = NoLogger
Or something...
Cheers, Tim
On 25 Feb 2010, at 09:32, Marius wrote:
I'd opt in for something like:
LiftRules.logger =
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 10:32 AM, Marius marius.dan...@gmail.com wrote:
I'd opt in for something like:
LiftRules.logger = Log4J
Agree this fits the current idioms, but how should this be triggered?
The new logging code is in lift-common so cannot call stuff in
LiftRules.
Note we're not
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Timothy Perrett
timo...@getintheloop.eu wrote:
+1
This fits with the idioms we already have. Although, so Lift doesn't carry a
default dependency it would probably need to be:
// default
LiftRules.logger = NoLogger
I'm not sure this is worth it. It's
Then perhaps:
LiftRules.initLogger(Log4J)
On Feb 25, 12:16 pm, Jeppe Nejsum Madsen je...@ingolfs.dk wrote:
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 10:32 AM, Marius marius.dan...@gmail.com wrote:
I'd opt in for something like:
LiftRules.logger = Log4J
Agree this fits the current idioms, but how should
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 11:44 AM, Marius marius.dan...@gmail.com wrote:
Then perhaps:
LiftRules.initLogger(Log4J)
I'll buy that :-)
/Jeppe
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Lift group.
To post to this group, send email to lift...@googlegroups.com.
Hello,
ticket created: http://www.assembla.com/spaces/liftweb/tickets/368
On Feb 24, 2010, at 6:28 PM, David Pollak wrote:
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 7:33 AM, Adam Warski a...@warski.org wrote:
Hello,
I'm integrating recaptcha into a Lift app that uses MegaProtoUser, and
there's one
Thanks for the tips, Tim. We have used StatefulSession for multi-page
workflows, but it didn't occur to me to try it in this context.
Sean
On Feb 24, 2:55 pm, tiro tim.romb...@googlemail.com wrote:
not sure if I posted the
Why should an initLogger method be in LiftRules?
-
Mariusmarius.dan...@gmail.com wrote:
Then perhaps:
LiftRules.initLogger(Log4J)
On Feb 25, 12:16 pm, Jeppe Nejsum Madsen je...@ingolfs.dk wrote:
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 10:32 AM, Marius
Why SessionVars are almost always a bad idea IMHO ?
On Feb 24, 9:54 pm, tiro tim.romb...@googlemail.com wrote:
Hi,
I had a similar discussion on this list a while ago.
http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb/browse_thread/thread/69898fb51...
I haven't found THE idiomatic answer in Lift. For
I just refreshed my environment. I am using Lift 2.0 snapshot dated
20100224204407.
Cliff
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 10:41 PM, David Pollak
feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 2:35 PM, Cliff Zhao zha...@gmail.com wrote:
One of my project requirements is to be
Super. It removed all generated javascript code.
Thank you very much.
Best Regards,
Cliff Zhao
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 7:00 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim naftoli...@gmail.comwrote:
LiftRules.enableLiftGC = false
LiftRules.autoIncludeAjax = _ = false
-
Peter
On 25 February 2010 10:23, Jeppe Nejsum Madsen je...@ingolfs.dk wrote:
2) Initialize the logging backend
What needs to be initialized?
Wouldn't auto initialization be nice?
Heiko
Company: weiglewilczek.com
Blog: heikoseeberger.name
Follow me: twitter.com/hseeberger
OSGi on Scala:
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 5:35 PM, Heiko Seeberger
heiko.seeber...@googlemail.com wrote:
On 25 February 2010 10:23, Jeppe Nejsum Madsen je...@ingolfs.dk wrote:
2) Initialize the logging backend
What needs to be initialized?
Loading (dev|prod|default) property file that specifies appenders, log
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 8:43 AM, Rick R rick.richard...@gmail.com wrote:
{jsonCall(pressed, JsRaw(event.which)).toJsCmd}
How about:
onkeypress={processKeyPress(function(a) {+jsonCall(pressed,
JsRaw(a)).toJsCmd+})}
This will pass a function to the processKeyPress method. If you
I am unable to reproduce this behavior. Can you post an example of your
code to a GitHub project and open a ticket at
https://liftweb.assembla.com/spaces/liftweb/tickets and I'll look into it.
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 7:53 AM, Cliff Zhao zha...@gmail.com wrote:
I just refreshed my environment.
val xml = t:node attr=some/t:node
with
val processed = bind(t,xml, node - a /)
becomes
a attr=some/a
How do I suppress the mixin of attr?
Thank you,
Jasper
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Lift group.
To post to this group, send email to
That's funny, because I'm a Haskell coder. As soon as I hit
Javascript, both sides of my brain turn off. I think it's the curly
braces that do it.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Lift group.
To post to this group, send email to
1. what Lift version are you using?
2. Can you try with other attribute name or with multiple attributes?
On Feb 25, 6:53 pm, jasper jasper.raedi...@gmail.com wrote:
val xml = t:node attr=some/t:node
with
val processed = bind(t,xml, node - a /)
becomes
a attr=some/a
How do I suppress
I am using version 1.03. The name and amount of attributes does not
matter. All attributes are being passed on.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Lift group.
To post to this group, send email to lift...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group,
I have also just realized that I forgot to prefix for the attributes
above:
val xml = t:node attr=some/t:node
should have been:
val xml = t:node t:attr=some/t:node
The result stays the same (without the prefix):
a attr=some/a
Sorry for the mistake and the additional mail traffic!
--
You
The mixin behavior is a bug, and is fixed in 1.1 and 2.0. You should switch to
2.0-SNAPSHOT (or 2.0-M2 if you don't like SNAPSHOTs) unless you have a
compelling reason to stay at 1.0
-Ross
On Feb 25, 2010, at 12:13 PM, jasper wrote:
I have also just realized that I forgot to prefix for the
I have pages that I've created with standard HTML forms and javascript
validation. What is the fastest or best way to use them in my Lift
app? Do I have to completely rewrite in Lift snippets using JsCmds in
order to tie into the already named fields and form, or is there
something I'm missing?
Fantastic support.
Thank you very much.
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 2:01 PM, David Pollak feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 10:56 AM, Cliff Zhao zha...@gmail.com wrote:
Does Lift alway create an HTTP session?
If you go through the Lift templating system, yes.
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 10:48 AM, Ross Mellgren dri...@gmail.com wrote:
My concern about putting this in LiftRules is that not all applications
that could benefit from the new logging support will use webkit, since the
logging is in common.
Maybe a bridge method in LiftRules to put it in a
David,
I have done some investigation and found:
1. The problem does not appear if I use lift:surround
2. It will appear if I do not use lift:surround, namely I do not use any
template.
My guess is:
1. using lift:surround, the html tag, which has the xmlns and xmlns:lift
attribute, is in the
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 7:48 PM, Ross Mellgren dri...@gmail.com wrote:
My concern about putting this in LiftRules is that not all applications that
could benefit from the new logging support will use webkit, since the logging
is in common.
Maybe a bridge method in LiftRules to put it in a
because I haven't yet encountered a use case where they correspond to
expected behaviour if the user happens to know how to work with a
tabbed browser.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Lift group.
To post to this group, send email to
My concern about putting this in LiftRules is that not all applications that
could benefit from the new logging support will use webkit, since the logging
is in common.
Maybe a bridge method in LiftRules to put it in a convenient place, but I think
the actual work should be exposed nearby the
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 10:12 AM, Cliff Zhao zha...@gmail.com wrote:
David,
I have done some investigation and found:
1. The problem does not appear if I use lift:surround
2. It will appear if I do not use lift:surround, namely I do not use any
template.
My guess is:
1. using
Why not? LiftRules is about configuring a lift app at startup.
On 25 feb., 16:56, Naftoli Gugenheim naftoli...@gmail.com wrote:
Why should an initLogger method be in LiftRules?
-
Mariusmarius.dan...@gmail.com wrote:
Then perhaps:
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 10:56 AM, Cliff Zhao zha...@gmail.com wrote:
Does Lift alway create an HTTP session?
If you go through the Lift templating system, yes.
My code doesn't use any HTTP session, but in the very first request's
response, I can see the Set-Cookie for JSESSIONID.
Is
Does Lift alway create an HTTP session?
My code doesn't use any HTTP session, but in the very first request's
response, I can see the Set-Cookie for JSESSIONID.
Is there a way to write session free web applications with Lift?
Thank you very much.
Best Regards,
Cliff Zhao
--
You received
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 12:40 PM, Richard richard.m.willi...@gmail.com wrote:
I have pages that I've created with standard HTML forms and javascript
validation. What is the fastest or best way to use them in my Lift
app? Do I have to completely rewrite in Lift snippets using JsCmds in
order to
Wait, I misunderstood something.
What's the difference between logger = X and initLogger(X)?
-
Mariusmarius.dan...@gmail.com wrote:
Why not? LiftRules is about configuring a lift app at startup.
On 25 feb., 16:56, Naftoli Gugenheim naftoli...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi, I'd like to get some opinions on the following.
You may want to read http://reviewboard.liftweb.net/r/158/.
I have on Review Board a patch for some date-and-time parsing and formatting
configuration. I put the settings inside a singleton object called
ConversionRules.
The question is, where
use -% instead of -.
see this thread.
http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb/browse_thread/thread/8fa4e5671fc74765/3894123e29da467b?lnk=gstq=Snippet+attribute+pass+through
Pomu
2010/2/26 jasper jasper.raedi...@gmail.com:
val xml = t:node attr=some/t:node
with
val processed = bind(t,xml,
We were talking in another thread about having something kind of similar to
this where the configuration is held in lift-util (maybe lift-common) but it is
accessible through LiftRules. I think it could be a good idea to do this for
this as well, to help guide people to the right place for this
I'm sure this has been discussed before, but I'm curious as to the
rationale for the Box ADT. I'm most distressed by the fact that it
seems to be masquerading as a drop-in Option replacement, and yet the
mathematical properties of the ADT are widely divergent. What's more,
the API is very, very
I'm assuming you know that it has a third, Failure state, and you're asking
about the names.
I guess open_! is in keeping with the metaphor of a box (or originally, a can).
The _! is Lift's way of saying, Danger! And I guess 'or' is just shorter. (Lift
tends to put practicality before academic
Daniel,
I would like to look at this question from a solution oriented
perspective: Certainly you already noticed the third Box subtype Failure and
are aware of its usage. I agree with you, that Option vs Box is confusing
for Lift (and nowadays Goat Rodeo) adopters. As Scala and Lift are still
Either -- but it's more verbose.
I'm not so sure David will want to rewrite the entire lift anyway...
-
Heiko Seebergerheiko.seeber...@googlemail.com wrote:
Daniel,
I would like to look at this question from a solution oriented
perspective: Certainly you
On 26 February 2010 08:09, Naftoli Gugenheim naftoli...@gmail.com wrote:
Either -- but it's more verbose.
I'm not so sure David will want to rewrite the entire lift anyway...
Right now, I only would like to listen to Daniel, OK?
Heiko
Company: weiglewilczek.com
Blog: heikoseeberger.name
46 matches
Mail list logo
