Isn't it easier to do the following?
ParentModel extends Model
{
ParentModel() {}
protected Object onGetObject(final Component component)
{
return component.getParent().getModel().getModelObject();
}
}
On 9/14/05, Johan Compagner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> and why can't
and why can't a new object not be deatached??
If you have a detachable model with roomID is the thing you store
if roomID is filled in then you do a query because you where editting an existing Room object
if roomID == null then you just create a new Room object.
Ofcourse if you have a multi page
Hi,
i never had the need to have 2 special models for new and existing
objects
What is then the difference?
The only thing a model really does it getting the modelObject. So
what you put in that can be an existing one or just a new Room()
Please give a better usecase for this
but "getting t
i never had the need to have 2 special models for new and existing objects
What is then the difference?
The only thing a model really does it getting the modelObject. So what
you put in that can be an existing one or just a new Room()
Please give a better usecase for this
For now replacing models i
Hi,
no then it isn't
But why are you changing a model itself?
Why not just the data? A model itself shouldn't have to change
after construction.
well, currently I have no use case for this, I just want to model
these dependencies in a way which reflect the things I want to
express. In thes
no then it isn't
But why are you changing a model itself?
Why not just the data? A model itself shouldn't have to change after construction.
You can ofcourse work with a ICompoundModel implementation (that you give youre parent)
and then resolve everything in that one for all the components that
Hi,
If you give a PropertyModel a Model as object then it will use that
as a nested model
If the nested model then updates the properyt model will also used
that object.
So what problem do you have with that?
what if you call setModel(...) on the parent object, which is allowed
and reasona
If you give a PropertyModel a Model as object then it will use that as a nested model
If the nested model then updates the properyt model will also used that object.
So what problem do you have with that?
On 9/14/05, Ralf Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,[original: - when having a page using a C
Hi,
[original: - when having a page using a CompoundPropertyModel which
has a form using a CompoundPropertyModel, how do I get the form's
model to map to a property of the page's model? (the pages model is
bound to "house", and I want the form's model to be bound to
"house.room" so the fo
ECTED] On Behalf Of Ralf Ebert
> Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2005 11:26 AM
> To: wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject: Re: [Wicket-user] CompoundPropertyModels
>
> Hi,
>
> > This would be done using: new CompoundPropertyModel(new
> > PropertyModel(getPage().ge
Hi,
This would be done using: new CompoundPropertyModel(new
PropertyModel(getPage().getModel(), "room"))
However, why don't you create a RoomEditForm, which looks something
like this:
public RoomEditForm extends Form
{
public RoomEditForm(String id, Room room)
{
super(id, n
Hava a look at the attatched & see if they help with (1). Basically,
there's an example of 'absolute' addressing and an example of
'relative' addressing.
I'm not sure if it's the best way, but it works...
/Gwyn
On 06/09/05, Ralf Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> some questions came upo
On 9/6/05, Ralf Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,- when having a page using a CompoundPropertyModel which has a formusing a CompoundPropertyModel, how do I get the form's model to mapto a property of the page's model? (the pages model is bound to"house", and I want the form's model to be bound t
Hi,
some questions came upon me while working with Wicket the last days.
I couldn't find anything about this in the resources online... Thanks
for any help!
- when having a page using a CompoundPropertyModel which has a form
using a CompoundPropertyModel, how do I get the form's model to
14 matches
Mail list logo
