I'm fine On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 10:15 PM, Igor Vaynberg <igor.vaynb...@gmail.com> wrote: > Why not call it wicket.bind since most people are probably familiar with > that already... > > -igor > On Nov 20, 2011 11:59 PM, "Martin Grigorov" <mgrigo...@apache.org> wrote: > >> Thanks Andrea, >> >> I have noticed it too. >> At one side we don't want to polute native JavaScript objects, like >> Funtion.prototype. >> On the other side I don't want to use any jQuery specific code at the >> server side. The current problem is that we have some hardcoded usages >> of ".bind(this)" in the .java code. >> >> I'll introduce Wicket#inCtx() in the JavaScript API that will delegate >> to jQuery.proxy and this will solve the problem. >> >> Any better solutions ? >> >> On Sun, Nov 20, 2011 at 6:46 PM, Andrea Del Bene <an.delb...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > The new implementation of wicket-ajax (based on JQuery) does not check >> > anymore if bind() function is defined. This causes Internet Explorer >> (from >> > 6 to 8) not to work with some components like AjaxLink. >> > >> > >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> Martin Grigorov >> jWeekend >> Training, Consulting, Development >> http://jWeekend.com >> >
-- Martin Grigorov jWeekend Training, Consulting, Development http://jWeekend.com
