Hi guys, can I have some of your thoughts on the Click Framework?
f(t)
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express
Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take
control of your XML. No limits. Just
I was an user of click.
I was fed up of self handling model data. click has no direct linking of
pagefields to modelfields.
I asked the developers, but they did not see the advantage of doing click
the model binding.
click uses velocity, wicket html.
I prefer the wicket way.
Francisco Diaz
Thanks, I also pointed out here that Click didn't use model binding.
But I am failing in the way to transmit the importance of that.
Because it is argued that from the form. you can do a one line:
form.copyTo(YourModel);
as long as the field names in your form matches the field names in the
It's not only about the binding. Form values - Form bean that's just
one part. The other is deciding where the bean is stored. In session?
Sure. But if you manually store it into session you are going to get
into troubles sooner or later.
Will you store it under a key? Great. But what if user
I think this message was not for me.
Either that, or I didn't understand you.
Wicket uses this storage and so far so good.
So does Seaside and I wouldn't expect ASP critics on this framework... :P
best regards,
f(t)
On 6/6/07, Matej Knopp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's not only about the
