https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-4418
there is a link to a benchmark
On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 11:13 PM, Johan Compagner <jcompag...@gmail.com> wrote:
> or use the let statement.. but support in all browsers could be a bit
> tricky ;)
> shouild be javascript 1.7 (thats FF 2.0 from 2006) but i don't think its in
> EcmaScript yet (looks like EcmaScript 6 gets it) and most other browsers
> follow that and do currently Edition 5.x or something
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 17:16, Frank van Lankvelt <f...@a-eskwadraat.nl>wrote:
>
>>
>> On 8 feb. 2012, at 16:01, Emond Papegaaij <emond.papega...@topicus.nl>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > In Wicket 6, onDomReady and onLoad scripts are merged into one big
>> script in
>> > the ResourceAggregator. This is to prevent many script tags, all with
>> > $(document).ready(function(){...}) (or the wicket equivalent). This
>> merging is
>> > only done for non-AJAX requests, to preserve the separate evaluates.
>> Removing
>> > this check, will merge all evals into one.
>> >
>> > One side note, the {}s are not added yet.
>> >
>> I'm not sure if this was implemented already, but javascript blocks do not
>> limit the scope of variables. See e.g. Crockford
>> http://javascript.crockford.com/code.html
>> The only way to limit scope is to use functions, according to this
>> document.
>>
>> Cheers, Frank
>>
>> > Emond
>> >
>> > On Wednesday 08 February 2012 16:54:17 Martin Grigorov wrote:
>> >> On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 4:50 PM, Emond Papegaaij
>> >>
>> >> <emond.papega...@topicus.nl> wrote:
>> >>> This is very easy to accomplish in 6.0. You only have to delete the
>> code
>> >>> that keeps the scripts separate when AJAX :). I can fix this, if you
>> >>> want?
>> >> I think we talk about different things.
>> >> I talk about Ajax response:
>> >> <ajax-response>
>> >> <evaluate> someJS1();</evaluate>
>> >> <evaluate> someJS2();</evaluate>
>> >> <evaluate> someJS3();</evaluate>
>> >> <component id="someId"><div>new content</div>
>> >> </ajax-request>
>> >>
>> >>> Emond
>> >>>
>> >>> On Wednesday 08 February 2012 16:44:14 Martin Grigorov wrote:
>> >>>> On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 4:33 PM, Bertrand Guay-Paquet
>> >>>>
>> >>>> <ber...@step.polymtl.ca> wrote:
>> >>>>> Hi,
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Merging multiple evaluates together will change the scope of some
>> >>>>> variables. The variables in the scope of an evaluate block would
>> carry
>> >>>>> on
>> >>>>> in the following evaluate blocks. This could however be mitigated by
>> >>>>> wrapping each evaluate block in its own function.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> True.
>> >>>> Wrapping them in {} should be enough to prevent this problem.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> Bertrand
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> On 08/02/2012 8:24 AM, Martin Grigorov wrote:
>> >>>>>> Hi,
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Do you imagine a use case in which several<evaluate>s in
>> >>>>>> <ajax-response> should be executed separately (one after another)
>> as
>> >>>>>> it is now ?
>> >>>>>> Each<evaluate> (and<priority-evaluate>) is executed in an eval() in
>> >>>>>> wicket-ajax.js. As we all know eval() is slow. As an optimization I
>> >>>>>> think we can merge all<evaluate>s in one (at server side) and eval
>> >>>>>> them all together. The only drawback I see is that error reporting
>> >>>>>> will be worse because the exception message will say "there is an
>> >>>>>> error in 'all JS in one<evaluate> here' "
>> >
>>
--
Martin Grigorov
jWeekend
Training, Consulting, Development
http://jWeekend.com
