>> If there's any framework that let's you develop mini-applications
>> seamlessly, it's Wicket.
>
> If one can easily build a group of components that will appear on different
> pages and work together collaboratively as a whole functional unit that's
> great.
You certainly can, it's all a matter
Hi again Eeclo (et al.),
Thanks for taking the time to discuss this.
On 10/06/2008, at 4:50 PM, Eelco Hillenius wrote:
Sorry, I used the wrong term there. I didn't mean specifically
components
as in "parts of a dynamic Web page" but rather what Django calls
"applications" (which really are
> Sorry, I used the wrong term there. I didn't mean specifically components
> as in "parts of a dynamic Web page" but rather what Django calls
> "applications" (which really are components in the more general sense of the
> word - how's that for confusing ;-).
>
> Django Web applications can be co
Hi Eelco (and others),
Thanks for your post.
On 09/06/2008, at 11:37 AM, Eelco Hillenius wrote:
I don't know about Django, but I think Wicket comes with quite a
number of reusable components. And as I believe that you typically
want to customize components for your own use anyway, I think it
be best for your case to build a set of
>> utilities (as that's pretty much what you need to make the integration
>> work if I understand it correctly) that suit your needs.
>>
>
>
-
___
http://stubbisms.wordpress.com http://stubbisms.wordpress.
com http://stubbisms.wordpress.com
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Status-of-Wicket-and-Groovy--tp17710986p17745477.html
Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Yeah, I read that later in the thread. Oops! :)
On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 12:09 PM, Eelco Hillenius
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Anonymous classes aren't needed in Groovy. In Groovy, you have closures.
>
> Dmitry hinted in his reply that closures can't be serialized by default...
>
> Eelco
>
> --
> Anonymous classes aren't needed in Groovy. In Groovy, you have closures.
Dmitry hinted in his reply that closures can't be serialized by default...
Eelco
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-
On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 1:38 AM, Dmitry Kandalov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I like the idea of using groovy and in general using dynamic language would be
> interesting indeed. But I think you might be not 100% correct about using
> groovy as it is. The main problem in my view is the lack of anon
On Monday 09 June 2008 10:47:45 Eelco Hillenius wrote:
> > IMHO they cannot be easily used together at the moment.
>
> Hmmm, interesting. My only experience with Groovy is years ago, and
> back then we abandoned and switched to PNuts (which I guess should
> work with Wicket as well) due to Groovy's
> IMHO they cannot be easily used together at the moment.
Hmmm, interesting. My only experience with Groovy is years ago, and
back then we abandoned and switched to PNuts (which I guess should
work with Wicket as well) due to Groovy's immaturity back then.
Dima, are these problems hard to overcom
On Saturday 07 June 2008 22:09:02 Ashley Aitken wrote:
> So my question is: what is the status (now and going forward) with
> regards to using Groovy to develop with Wicket? I know there has been
> much discussion of generifying Wicket but perhaps moving to a dynamic
> language could be an a
> I know Wicket makes it very easy to develop components and there are some
> component libraries (e.g. Wicket Stuff) but it doesn't seem like there are
> as many (high level components) as Django or that they are as easy to
> integrate (that's just my perception).
I don't know about Django, but I
Howdy All,
There's a question at the end of this long intro:
I've been evaluating and comparing a number of Web frameworks again,
particularly at this time Wicket (which I have looked at previously
and tried out) and Django (which I am new to but comes highly
recommended).
I very much l
14 matches
Mail list logo
