I have experience with both Click and Wicket, and while they are both component-based frameworks, they are very different in how they handle pages. Click uses Velocity by default for its page templates, while Wicket uses HTML with a custom namespace mixed in. I prefer the Velocity approach because you get the same results with less typing.
Click's page classes resemble Swing in how they are constructed: set properties, add listeners, and you're ready to go. Wicket classes are similar, but you have to override so many methods to get the desired result. As far as I know, Wicket pages persist between requests while Click pages are constructed for each request. Wicket relies on a Java class rather than an XML document to make settings while Click uses click.xml by default. Wicket uses the concept of models for its components much like Swing. Click relies less on this concept, making it simpler to work with. So far, the XML-free configuration is the only advantage I like in Wicket. Otherwise, I would use Click. From: [email protected] Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2013 23:40:55 +0300 Subject: Comparison with Apache Wicket To: [email protected] Hi, I noticed the mail about stopping development on Click. Can someone of you compare Click with Apache Wicket ? If you have experience with both frameworks I'll be glad to hear what you believe Click does better than Wicket and what is better in Wicket. Thank you in advance! Daniel
