I'm familiar with that approach, but it seems a bit cumbersome - especially for collections of non-serializable objects. I was hoping there was some other way.
-Chris On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 9:41 PM, Jeremy Thomerson <[email protected]> wrote: > Use a LoadableDetachableModel that can re-inflate / re-retrieve your > serializable object. It may only need to store something like a class name > and an integer ID, etc. This keeps session state small as well. > Serialization of all models allows for easier clustering when your site > becomes the next Twitter. > > -- > Jeremy Thomerson > http://www.wickettraining.com > > > On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 10:36 PM, Chris Hansen <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> First off, I'm new to Wicket and I have to say I'm really liking it so far. >> >> One concern I have is related to using non-serializable objects. If >> I'm not mistaken, some other web frameworks will create dynamic, >> serializable proxies for your non-serializable objects automatically, >> when possible. I saw that this type of functionality is used in >> Wicket's Guice integration, but I am wondering why it isn't a part of >> Wicket proper. Using serializable model objects seems like a fine >> goal, but what if those model objects are in a library which is not >> under our control and they happen to not be serializable? >> >> There must be downsides to the proxy approach that I'm not aware of, >> or an easier way to work with non-serializable model objects. Am I >> missing something? >> >> Thanks, >> Chris >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> 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]
