Re: Intention of PropertyModel in 1.3
Thank you very much!! On Sun, 2008-03-30 at 21:46 -0700, Igor Vaynberg wrote: > patch applied. always report a jira issue, that way things dont get > forgotten, and as you can see submitting a patch helps too :) > > -igor > > > On Sun, Mar 30, 2008 at 9:36 PM, David Leangen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > I didn't happen to see a reply to this thread, and the stack trace is > > still driving me bananas, so I submitted a patch. :-) > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-1464 > > > > > > Thanks, as always, Wicket committers. :-) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, 2008-03-13 at 12:45 +0900, David Leangen wrote: > > > > > > > This used to work in 1.2.6, but now 1.3.1 complains that > > > > > > > there is no setter for this class. > > > > > > > > > hmm, this should still work. mind filing a jira bug with > > > > > > a quickstart? > > > > > > > > You're right, it does still work. The thing is that during the > > algorithm > > > > > when the properties of the bean are being tested the entire exception > > > > > stack is being printed out. > > > > > > > > > > This is a bit confusing because it can lead the developer to think > > that > > > > > an error occurred. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I propose to log information instead of printing out the entire > > > > > exception stack. If you agree to this, I don't mind submitting a > > patch. > > > > > > > What level is this reported to? > > > > Its not error right? > > > > > > > > > Current, DEBUG. > > > > > > Still, though, I think a logging message would be better than polluting > > output with the entire stack trace... > > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > Dave > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > - > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Intention of PropertyModel in 1.3
patch applied. always report a jira issue, that way things dont get forgotten, and as you can see submitting a patch helps too :) -igor On Sun, Mar 30, 2008 at 9:36 PM, David Leangen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I didn't happen to see a reply to this thread, and the stack trace is > still driving me bananas, so I submitted a patch. :-) > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-1464 > > > Thanks, as always, Wicket committers. :-) > > > > > > > On Thu, 2008-03-13 at 12:45 +0900, David Leangen wrote: > > > > > > This used to work in 1.2.6, but now 1.3.1 complains that > > > > > > there is no setter for this class. > > > > > > > hmm, this should still work. mind filing a jira bug with > > > > > a quickstart? > > > > > > You're right, it does still work. The thing is that during the > algorithm > > > > when the properties of the bean are being tested the entire exception > > > > stack is being printed out. > > > > > > > > This is a bit confusing because it can lead the developer to think that > > > > an error occurred. > > > > > > > > > > > > I propose to log information instead of printing out the entire > > > > exception stack. If you agree to this, I don't mind submitting a patch. > > > > > What level is this reported to? > > > Its not error right? > > > > > > Current, DEBUG. > > > > Still, though, I think a logging message would be better than polluting > output with the entire stack trace... > > > > > > Cheers, > > Dave > > > > > > > > - > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Intention of PropertyModel in 1.3
I didn't happen to see a reply to this thread, and the stack trace is still driving me bananas, so I submitted a patch. :-) https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-1464 Thanks, as always, Wicket committers. :-) On Thu, 2008-03-13 at 12:45 +0900, David Leangen wrote: > > > > > This used to work in 1.2.6, but now 1.3.1 complains that > > > > > there is no setter for this class. > > > > > hmm, this should still work. mind filing a jira bug with > > > > a quickstart? > > > > You're right, it does still work. The thing is that during the algorithm > > > when the properties of the bean are being tested the entire exception > > > stack is being printed out. > > > > > > This is a bit confusing because it can lead the developer to think that > > > an error occurred. > > > > > > > > > I propose to log information instead of printing out the entire > > > exception stack. If you agree to this, I don't mind submitting a patch. > > > What level is this reported to? > > Its not error right? > > > Current, DEBUG. > > Still, though, I think a logging message would be better than polluting > output with the entire stack trace... > > > Cheers, > Dave > > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Intention of PropertyModel in 1.3
> > > > This used to work in 1.2.6, but now 1.3.1 complains that > > > > there is no setter for this class. > > > hmm, this should still work. mind filing a jira bug with > > > a quickstart? > > You're right, it does still work. The thing is that during the algorithm > > when the properties of the bean are being tested the entire exception > > stack is being printed out. > > > > This is a bit confusing because it can lead the developer to think that > > an error occurred. > > > > > > I propose to log information instead of printing out the entire > > exception stack. If you agree to this, I don't mind submitting a patch. > What level is this reported to? > Its not error right? Current, DEBUG. Still, though, I think a logging message would be better than polluting output with the entire stack trace... Cheers, Dave - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Intention of PropertyModel in 1.3
What level is this reported to?
Its not error right?
On 3/10/08, David Leangen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Just to follow up on this...
>
> You're right, it does still work. The thing is that during the algorithm
> when the properties of the bean are being tested the entire exception
> stack is being printed out.
>
> This is a bit confusing because it can lead the developer to think that
> an error occurred.
>
>
> I propose to log information instead of printing out the entire
> exception stack. If you agree to this, I don't mind submitting a patch.
>
>
> dml
>
>
>
> On Wed, 2008-02-13 at 09:38 -0800, Igor Vaynberg wrote:
> > hmm, this should still work. mind filing a jira bug with a quickstart?
> >
> > -igor
> >
> >
> > On Feb 13, 2008 12:00 AM, David Leangen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hello!
> > >
> > > I'm (finally!) migrating to 1.3, so have a few wrinkles to iron out.
> > >
> > > Is somebody able to tell me the intention of the PropertyModel? I'm
> > > wondering if something has changed, or if I just wasn't using it
> > > correctly before...
> > >
> > >
> > > In one of my panels, I use this type of property:
> > >
> > > PropertyModel languageModel = new PropertyModel( this, "language" );
> > >
> > > And in the same class, I have a getter like this:
> > >
> > > public String getLanguage()
> > > {
> > > return getSession().getLocale().getLanguage();
> > > }
> > >
> > > There is no setter and no "language" property.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > This used to work in 1.2.6, but now 1.3.1 complains that there is no
> > > setter for this class.
> > >
> > > Now, I don't even _want_ a setter, but just to see what happens, I add
> > > in a dummy setter, but wicket still complains that it can't find a
> > > "language" property.
> > >
> > >
> > > Am I not using the PropertyModel correctly (i.e. according to what
> > > PropertyModel is intended for)? (If so, this means that I've been using
> > > it incorrectly for many months without noticing, since it used to work.)
> > >
> > > Or, should I be using some other type of model for this?
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanx!
> > > Dave
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> > >
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Intention of PropertyModel in 1.3
Just to follow up on this...
You're right, it does still work. The thing is that during the algorithm
when the properties of the bean are being tested the entire exception
stack is being printed out.
This is a bit confusing because it can lead the developer to think that
an error occurred.
I propose to log information instead of printing out the entire
exception stack. If you agree to this, I don't mind submitting a patch.
dml
On Wed, 2008-02-13 at 09:38 -0800, Igor Vaynberg wrote:
> hmm, this should still work. mind filing a jira bug with a quickstart?
>
> -igor
>
>
> On Feb 13, 2008 12:00 AM, David Leangen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Hello!
> >
> > I'm (finally!) migrating to 1.3, so have a few wrinkles to iron out.
> >
> > Is somebody able to tell me the intention of the PropertyModel? I'm
> > wondering if something has changed, or if I just wasn't using it
> > correctly before...
> >
> >
> > In one of my panels, I use this type of property:
> >
> > PropertyModel languageModel = new PropertyModel( this, "language" );
> >
> > And in the same class, I have a getter like this:
> >
> > public String getLanguage()
> > {
> > return getSession().getLocale().getLanguage();
> > }
> >
> > There is no setter and no "language" property.
> >
> >
> >
> > This used to work in 1.2.6, but now 1.3.1 complains that there is no
> > setter for this class.
> >
> > Now, I don't even _want_ a setter, but just to see what happens, I add
> > in a dummy setter, but wicket still complains that it can't find a
> > "language" property.
> >
> >
> > Am I not using the PropertyModel correctly (i.e. according to what
> > PropertyModel is intended for)? (If so, this means that I've been using
> > it incorrectly for many months without noticing, since it used to work.)
> >
> > Or, should I be using some other type of model for this?
> >
> >
> > Thanx!
> > Dave
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Intention of PropertyModel in 1.3
hmm, this should still work. mind filing a jira bug with a quickstart?
-igor
On Feb 13, 2008 12:00 AM, David Leangen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hello!
>
> I'm (finally!) migrating to 1.3, so have a few wrinkles to iron out.
>
> Is somebody able to tell me the intention of the PropertyModel? I'm
> wondering if something has changed, or if I just wasn't using it
> correctly before...
>
>
> In one of my panels, I use this type of property:
>
> PropertyModel languageModel = new PropertyModel( this, "language" );
>
> And in the same class, I have a getter like this:
>
> public String getLanguage()
> {
> return getSession().getLocale().getLanguage();
> }
>
> There is no setter and no "language" property.
>
>
>
> This used to work in 1.2.6, but now 1.3.1 complains that there is no
> setter for this class.
>
> Now, I don't even _want_ a setter, but just to see what happens, I add
> in a dummy setter, but wicket still complains that it can't find a
> "language" property.
>
>
> Am I not using the PropertyModel correctly (i.e. according to what
> PropertyModel is intended for)? (If so, this means that I've been using
> it incorrectly for many months without noticing, since it used to work.)
>
> Or, should I be using some other type of model for this?
>
>
> Thanx!
> Dave
>
>
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Intention of PropertyModel in 1.3
Hi David,
I'm not able to tell you the intention of the PropertyModel.
My guess for coding to your spec in 1.3 would be:
IModel languageModel = new AbstractReadOnlyModel() {
@Override
public Object getObject() {
return getSession().getLocale().getLanguage(); }
};
in your special case you probably could do this too:
IModel languageModel = new PropertyModel(this,
"session.locale.language")));
But than your 'readonly' intention might be not that clear.
martin
2008/2/13, David Leangen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>
> Hello!
>
> I'm (finally!) migrating to 1.3, so have a few wrinkles to iron out.
>
> Is somebody able to tell me the intention of the PropertyModel? I'm
> wondering if something has changed, or if I just wasn't using it
> correctly before...
>
>
> In one of my panels, I use this type of property:
>
> PropertyModel languageModel = new PropertyModel( this, "language" );
>
> And in the same class, I have a getter like this:
>
> public String getLanguage()
> {
> return getSession().getLocale().getLanguage();
> }
>
> There is no setter and no "language" property.
>
>
>
> This used to work in 1.2.6, but now 1.3.1 complains that there is no
> setter for this class.
>
> Now, I don't even _want_ a setter, but just to see what happens, I add
> in a dummy setter, but wicket still complains that it can't find a
> "language" property.
>
>
> Am I not using the PropertyModel correctly (i.e. according to what
> PropertyModel is intended for)? (If so, this means that I've been using
> it incorrectly for many months without noticing, since it used to work.)
>
> Or, should I be using some other type of model for this?
>
>
> Thanx!
> Dave
>
>
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
Intention of PropertyModel in 1.3
Hello!
I'm (finally!) migrating to 1.3, so have a few wrinkles to iron out.
Is somebody able to tell me the intention of the PropertyModel? I'm
wondering if something has changed, or if I just wasn't using it
correctly before...
In one of my panels, I use this type of property:
PropertyModel languageModel = new PropertyModel( this, "language" );
And in the same class, I have a getter like this:
public String getLanguage()
{
return getSession().getLocale().getLanguage();
}
There is no setter and no "language" property.
This used to work in 1.2.6, but now 1.3.1 complains that there is no
setter for this class.
Now, I don't even _want_ a setter, but just to see what happens, I add
in a dummy setter, but wicket still complains that it can't find a
"language" property.
Am I not using the PropertyModel correctly (i.e. according to what
PropertyModel is intended for)? (If so, this means that I've been using
it incorrectly for many months without noticing, since it used to work.)
Or, should I be using some other type of model for this?
Thanx!
Dave
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
