It was neither a bug nor a feature: I'm simply an idiot. I was using a
custom TextField which overrides isEnabled()... D'Oh!
Sorry for wasting your time with this, Igor!
- Johannes
Johannes Fahrenkrug wrote:
I will. I'm already looking at the FormComponent code. I have to go now,
but I'll
On 1/23/07, Johan Compagner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
it is strange isn't it
now you fixed it so it works on the server
Hmm.. and it works on my machine as well. Windows Sucks(tm)
Frank
-
Take Surveys. Earn Cash.
you can't just write to something in the constructor (thats in the
event/request phase)
make a RequestTarget that outputs that what you want and set that request
target as the response request target
on the request cycle
RequestCycle.get().setRequestTarget(new IRequestTarget()
{
void
We already have a getValue on formcomponent
that is the input value from the request or the model object as a string
(just the latest value)
So then that also has to be renamed. (and relearned)
I think getModelObject() is just what it says. (besides the getModel() call
we also have!)
else it
Im -1.
As most of my models holds objects and not value, I've had no problem
understanding this part of the IModel.
I must admit that I may be blind to this because im used to the current naming,
and have been working with it for so long. I guess the new users would be the
ones best to tell
Thank you very much, Johan!
I wrote my own XMLRequestTarget around your code and now it works.
Daniel
Johan Compagner schrieb:
you can't just write to something in the constructor (thats in the
event/request phase)
make a RequestTarget that outputs that what you want and set that
request
Hi Igor!
Igor Vaynberg schrieb:
looks like you are trying to output your xml too late in the game
(wicket has already written something to the request).
I would rather guess it seems the other way around (and I will try to
explain the situation a bit better):
* If I use res.write(
If you want to, i'll send you our corrected palette.
These lines are especially interesting:
From palette:
protected void onModelChanged() {
super.onModelChanged();
if (recorderComponent != null) {
recorderComponent.reCreateModel();
On 23/01/07, Jonathan Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
... in fact, that term is actually ambiguous since the object
implementing IModel might be informally understood to be the model object
(which is not what we mean)...
You're very right. This is the major contributor to my confusion about
yes and i rechecked it in.
Because the file you checked in is just plain wrong.
Those extra empty spaces don't make any sense!
Please recheck if it fails again for you and then test why those extra
spaces are in front of every empty line.
So i guess Windows Rules.. others just suck! :)
johan
Johan Compagner wrote:
So i guess Windows Rules.. others just suck! :)
To rule and to suck can go hand in hand as well :)
-
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and
If it is user opinion wanted, for what I am it is -1.
I would be please with the change if I used wicket for a home hobby of
making something easy. But the problem is that I'm working in a production
environment. Every thing that will make 2.0 migration harder will make
sure that it will not
never seen it before.
On 1/22/07, Eelco Hillenius [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You better not look at it either as we're thinking about removing it! :)
Eelco
On 1/22/07, Ingram Chen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
never use it! (what is that ? :-p
On 1/23/07, Igor Vaynberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* Igor Vaynberg:
are you using Page.before/afterCallComponent? and if so what is
the usecase?
Not at all.
--
Jean-Baptiste Quenot
aka John Banana Qwerty
http://caraldi.com/jbq/
-
Take Surveys. Earn Cash.
* Igor Vaynberg:
there have been many changes to the palette in the recent past,
give it another try.
I would even say that the problem is fixed.
See https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-222
--
Jean-Baptiste Quenot
aka John Banana Qwerty
http://caraldi.com/jbq/
never heard of it, either :)
Igor Vaynberg wrote:
are you using Page.before/afterCallComponent? and if so what is the
usecase?
-igor
-
Take
No
On 1/23/07, Johannes Fahrenkrug [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
never heard of it, either :)
-
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
Igor, you got it. My local SVN was a confusing hybrid of references to old
(sf.net) mixed with new (asf). Apologies, and thanks.
igor.vaynberg wrote:
strange, you seem to have a pretty old copy
here what the latest looks like [1], notice line 1066 doesnt match what
you
have
also
Not using it (and I have also never seen it before).
Erik.
igor.vaynberg wrote:
are you using Page.before/afterCallComponent? and if so what is the
usecase?
-igor
--
View this message in context:
-1. Regardless of whether the change is for the better, it will break
way too much existing code not to mention the tutorials on the
internet etc.
Eelco
On 1/22/07, Jonathan Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
i'd like us to vote on changing IModel to this in 2.0 (i know it's very
late, but
-1 for changing the method signature
+1 for more model examples particularly contextual ones, i.e. with a form
you often use the form component itself as the model (I can work on this if
things go as I hope with our web ui proofs of concept -- otherwise I'll be
off learning JSF)
On 1/23/07,
Contributions to wicket-stuff are always welcome. You already have
write permissions correct? This sounds like something that would go
nicely in the wicket-contrib-examples project, where you could have
both the component and the example of how to use it. WDYT?
Eelco
On 1/22/07, Nino Wael [EMAIL
Good luck. And a user story or some other reference on the application
you built with Wicket would be a very welcome addition to the WIKI!
Eelco
On 1/22/07, Nino Wael [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I was wondering if any off you guys would be interested in some wicket
expertise, located
it happens :) no worries
-igor
On 1/23/07, Johannes Fahrenkrug [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It was neither a bug nor a feature: I'm simply an idiot. I was using a
custom TextField which overrides isEnabled()... D'Oh!
Sorry for wasting your time with this, Igor!
- Johannes
Johannes Fahrenkrug
or even better dont use a page at all, use a shared resource
-igor
On 1/23/07, Daniel Nüst [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thank you very much, Johan!
I wrote my own XMLRequestTarget around your code and now it works.
Daniel
Johan Compagner schrieb:
you can't just write to something in the
+1 Don't know if my vote counts or not, but anyway.
I'm one of those users that had trouble with the ambiguity between model
object (as in the IModel instance) and modelObject (the object contained
by the model). Worse, In my project's team all the modelObjects were
classes with the naming
It's been lying in coma for too long a time so it's time you pull the plug
on him. :-)
Frn6
On 1/22/07, Igor Vaynberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
are you using Page.before/afterCallComponent? and if so what is the
usecase?
-igor
+0 for changing, except not sure it's what Johnathan suggested.
My problem is with using the word Model at all for the objects that
access model properties (maybe they should be ModelAccessors,
ModelExposer, ModelAdaptor, ModelBridge, ModelConnector, or something
along the lines... then
I voted -1, but here is my opinion about the change proper.
public interface IModelV 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
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
it would be Component.getModelValue() not Component.getModelObject() i
think. what this disambiguates is what object you are referring to. the
problem is that IModel impl itself is an object, so when you say
component.getModelObject() what do you really want? the model object or the
object inside
Agreed. We have been discussing that in the past as well.
IModelLocator for instance might have been a better name. And
IModelLocator could then have get/setModel, as that's the real model
value you're looking at.
Eelco
On 1/23/07, Gustavo Hexsel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+0 for changing,
You make a good point. Something like IModelLocator would be a
clearer name for IModel. then its methods could be called get/setModel.
As you point out, IModel is only the model from the framework's
perspective. From the user's it is a model locator and the actual
model is the object
yes. that is the major concern.
for now, eelco could put a callout box in the book with a warning about
this ambiguity. we could also do the same in the javadoc for getModel()
and getModelObject() so any rare people who actually read the docs
won't be lost.
igor.vaynberg wrote:
it would
getModelValue would have been better than getModelObject yeah. That
said, imo (and I have stated this before), I think having those
methods in the first place is distracting, as it doesn't push people
in the direction of just letting the components and models work
directly for them.
Eelco
On
geez, this makes so much sense like this! ;-)
Eelco Hillenius wrote:
Agreed. We have been discussing that in the past as well.
IModelLocator for instance might have been a better name. And
IModelLocator could then have get/setModel, as that's the real model
value you're looking at.
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
Yeah, the only real argument for that method other than brevity is that you
could override it.
It would be unreliable outside the core though and I can't think of a reason
to do that offhand.
Eelco Hillenius wrote:
getModelValue would have been better than getModelObject yeah. That
said,
what do you think of gustav and eelco's IModelLocator / get/setModel idea?
Frank Silbermann wrote:
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
Yes, perhaps a better way to avoid overloading the word Model or
ModelObject is to use those words to refer to that which is wrapped
(usually a non-wicket oriented business object), and use something else
for the class which does the wrapping and provides access to the wicket
page component.
Now it works here as well. :)
Good job
On 1/23/07, Johan Compagner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
yes and i rechecked it in.
Because the file you checked in is just plain wrong.
Those extra empty spaces don't make any sense!
Please recheck if it fails again for you and then test why those extra
Hi all,
i experienced a problem with href attribute of rendered ExternalLink.
In our application, i needed to parse rendered html in a SaxParser
implementation. But i couldnt! When i looked in source codes of
ExternalLink and Link, i saw the problematic line is that, in ExternalLink
there is no
On 1/23/07, Eelco Hillenius [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
getModelValue would have been better than getModelObject yeah. That
said, imo (and I have stated this before), I think having those
methods in the first place is distracting, as it doesn't push people
in the direction of just letting the
Does Wicket 1.x have the ability to perform client-side form validation?
I'm looking for something similar to Tapestry's client-side validation
feature:
http://tapestry.apache.org/tapestry4.1/usersguide/clientside-validation.html
Cheers,
Sean
no, wicket doesnt provide this out of the box.
there have been some attempts to provide such functionality, i think there
was a project that integrated fvalidate js lib with wicket in wicket-stuff
somewhere.
-igor
On 1/23/07, Sean Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Does Wicket 1.x have the
Tapestry does a very good job with client-side form validation. Perhaps
there is code in the Tapestry repository that could be using in Wicket?
BTW, these are the things that I like about form validation in Tapestry 4.1
1) client-side form validation
2) CSS class for invalid fields
On 1/23/07, James McLaughlin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 1/23/07, Eelco Hillenius [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
getModelValue would have been better than getModelObject yeah. That
said, imo (and I have stated this before), I think having those
methods in the first place is distracting, as it
there are a couple of reasons why we havent done it
wicket's error reporting is very flexible as far as scoping and presentation
goes, it would not be trivial to get client-side and server-side matching,
eg multiple feedback panels with their own message filters, etc, etc.
you cannot perform
Hello,
textarea wicket:id=myString rows=10/textarea
FormComponent myStringComp = new TextArea(myString, new
PropertyModel(this, myString));
myStringComp.add(new AjaxFormComponentUpdatingBehavior(onchange){
protected void onUpdate(AjaxRequestTarget target) {
myString
It is actually pretty easy to build with Wicket if you want. Like Igor
said, there is a project for this in wicket-stuff, but as the
javascript project died and I (who set up the project) don't want to
support it much as I never actually used it for anything real. Imo
Ajax is a lot more powerful.
hmm can you try onblur instead of onchange, dont know if textarea supports
that event
-igor
On 1/23/07, Shawn Tumey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
textarea wicket:id=myString rows=10/textarea
FormComponent myStringComp = new TextArea(myString, new
PropertyModel(this, myString));
Wicket makes coding fun again! I don't have a Mac but I do have Dreamweaver
8. It has been a while since I have been using Dreamweaver so I almost
forgot what a superb program it still is. - ( I hope it is not against
Wicket ethics to discuss commercial tool$. )
I would like to ask if anyone
Wicket makes coding fun again! I don't have a Mac but I do have Dreamweaver
8. It has been a while since I have been using Dreamweaver so I almost
forgot what a superb program it still is. - ( I hope it is not against
Wicket ethics to discuss commercial tool$. )
I would like to ask if anyone
onblur has the same outcome as onchange.
Updates to myString that grow it, or shrink it work fine as long as there is
something in the textarea field. Clearing the field retains the previous
value.
BTW, this is using 1.2.4
any other ideas?
On of my coworkers suggested overloading the
With those names I am changing my vote to +1.
Erik.
Jonathan Locke wrote:
what do you think of gustav and eelco's IModelLocator / get/setModel idea?
--
Erik van Oosten
http://day-to-day-stuff.blogspot.com/
-
Hi Shawn,
Could you check that you have a single, properly nested form element
in the html? I vaguely remember someone having problems with this.
Erik.
Shawn Tumey wrote:
onblur has the same outcome as onchange.
Updates to myString that grow it, or shrink it work fine as long as
Hello Erik,
The form element is there.
Hello Igor,
I will have check with our software architect before I can upgrade to the
1.3x branch. I am moving on to other functionality for the time being.
Thanks to both of you for your assistance.
Any other suggestions?
Regards,
On 1/23/07, Erik
use wicket's ajax debug console to see what the url request is
then set a breakpoint in AjaxFormComponentUpdatingBehavior.onEvent and walk
it, see why its not setting the value to null
-igor
On 1/23/07, Shawn Tumey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello Erik,
The form element is there.
Hello
Hi,
just a quick post to announce that tonight I've released the first
public version of wicket-contrib-javaee (1.0), a module for Wicket
that provides integration with Java EE 5
With wicket-javaee you can use in your wicket pages three annotations
* @EJB
* @PersistenceUnit
*
The input is returning to the server as an empty string .
The field is required, so when the onEvent method checks
protected final void onEvent(final AjaxRequestTarget target)
{
final FormComponent formComponent = getFormComponent();
boolean callOnUpdate = true;
try
Congratulations!
Martijn
On 1/23/07, Filippo Diotalevi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
just a quick post to announce that tonight I've released the first
public version of wicket-contrib-javaee (1.0), a module for Wicket
that provides integration with Java EE 5
With wicket-javaee you can
Good to hear, thanks!
Eelco
On 1/23/07, Filippo Diotalevi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
just a quick post to announce that tonight I've released the first
public version of wicket-contrib-javaee (1.0), a module for Wicket
that provides integration with Java EE 5
With wicket-javaee you
jip i noticed this also. I guess it is something that the commented source
code that is removed from
the page after rendering did or whatever.
Can anybody look at the last thing that got stuck:
I put a DatePicker in a form that is in a ModalWindow. The DatePicker
rendered below the ModalWindow (z height) and was not active because only
the modal window was active. Is this anything like a known issue? I search
the history of this list and the wiki without success.
Thanks,
Scott
--
you have to use css to set a higher zvalue for the datepicker popup
-igor
On 1/23/07, Scott Swank [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I put a DatePicker in a form that is in a ModalWindow. The DatePicker
rendered below the ModalWindow (z height) and was not active because only
the modal window was
Note to self: must learn css better. Thanks.
On 1/23/07, Igor Vaynberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
you have to use css to set a higher zvalue for the datepicker popup
-igor
On 1/23/07, Scott Swank [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I put a DatePicker in a form that is in a ModalWindow. The
Yeah, Wicket made it possible for us to use dreamweaver again for
componentized webpages. Based from my experience, I can't find any usecase
to make a Dreamweaver extensions for Wicket.
On 24/01/07, nilo.de.roock [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Wicket makes coding fun again! I don't have a Mac but I
Eelco Hillenius wrote:
Well, every user (session) will use memory, correct. But only to a
certain limit. Wicket 1.2 holds a couple of page/ versions in a
session, and Wicket 2.0 by default only holds the current one. So the
creation of a fresh instance (e.g. a bookmarkable page) will
Any JPA library in the works? Specifically I am looking for a
replacement for wicket-stuff-hibernate-3.0
Gili
Filippo Diotalevi wrote:
Hi,
just a quick post to announce that tonight I've released the first
public version of wicket-contrib-javaee (1.0), a module for Wicket
that
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
It's just annotations for the most part. Crank it out. It would've
been months ago if you'd have just done it when you asked last year. :)
cowwoc wrote:
Any JPA library in the works? Specifically I am looking for a
replacement for
How can I instruct Wicket not to maintain the multiple versions of a given
page within the session? I've tried the following but when I dump the
session contents I still see multiple page versions:
getSessionSettings().setMaxPageMaps(1);
getPageSettings().setMaxPageVersions(1);
Am I
you do realize that by doing this you are completely killing the back button
support in your app
-igor
On 1/23/07, dukejansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Eelco Hillenius wrote:
Well, every user (session) will use memory, correct. But only to a
certain limit. Wicket 1.2 holds a couple
set the max to 0 then the change list of the version manager will really not
contain anything
this is the test: (after the new one is added to the list)
// If stack is overfull, remove oldest entry
if (getVersions() maxVersions)
{
expireOldestVersion();
}
73 matches
Mail list logo
