The methods are public RequestHandler map(Request request); public Url map(RequestHandler requestHandler);
is it not obvious from the parameter and return type what is mapped to what? -Matej On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 3:31 AM, James Carman <jcar...@carmanconsulting.com> wrote: > I'm not jazzed about the fact that both methods are named map() when > they're supposed to be inverses of one another. > > On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 6:47 PM, Igor Vaynberg <igor.vaynb...@gmail.com> wrote: >> as ive mentioned before, the focus of 1.5 will be the overhaul of how >> we handle the urls and process requests. this part of wicket has grown >> organically and has turned into a bunch of overcomplicated spaghetti >> code. >> >> matej and i (mostly matej) have been working on an clean room >> implementation that we think will be simpler, cleaner, and allow users >> to mangle their urls as much as they want. >> >> the preview is available here: >> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/wicket/sandbox/knopp/experimental/wicket-ng >> >> with a tiny test webapp here >> >> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/wicket/sandbox/knopp/experimental/wicket-ng-webapp >> >> this is just a small prototype to allow us to feel out the api before >> we begin the nightmarish task of merging this back into wicket proper. >> >> the main package of interest is org.apache.wicket.request which >> contains the two key players: RequestMapper and RequestHandler. these >> two entities work together to resolve and process urls, facilitated by >> the new and much simplified yet functional >> org.apache.wicket.requset.cycle.RequestCycle. >> >> the RequestHandler is analogous to IRequestTarget - its job is to >> generate a response to user's request. >> >> the RequestMapper is what maps urls to requesthandlers and back. this >> is the backbone of url handling. the interface is quiet simple, yet >> allows total flexibility. the mappers can be composed and chained, >> producing any kind of url scheme desirable. as well as allowing users >> to build the url hierarchy in any way they want rather then just >> working with absolute mounts like in 1.4. >> >> for example, the ever desirable /<locale>/<all else> url encoding >> scheme is now easily achievable by creating a mapper to take care of >> the /locale/ portion and chaining all other mappers behind that. >> >> and for the other ever desirable usecase of mounting things like so: >> /${user}/profile/${section}/detail there is now the >> org.apache.wicket.request.mapper.MountedMapper >> >> further, because mappers are chainable one can foresee a mapper who >> doesnt manipulate the url, but instead enforces a security constraint >> on a subset of url space. >> >> of interest are also: org/apache/wicket/request/url-format.txt and >> org/apache/wicket/page/page-management.txt >> >> feedback is welcome. above all we would like to hear all your weird >> and interesting url mapping scheme ideas so we can proof the api >> against them. >> >> -igor >> >
