Hi! I hope everyone had a great weekend!

I tried to add a frontend-maven-plugin to do the TS build inside of maven
build by simply enabling `ts-transpile` and it works pretty well.

Also committed a resulting wicket-ajax-jquery.js. A resulting code looks
very similar to original.

Here's the commit
https://github.com/andruhon/wicket/commit/8fc6ea95b77ee18f14356ccd4c5ed6ee725e16a4


пт, 3 мая 2019 г. в 17:41, Martin Grigorov <[email protected]>:

> Awesome!
> Thank you, Andrew!
>
> I've added few minor comments.
> It looks very promising!
>
> On Fri, May 3, 2019 at 7:59 AM Andrew Kondratev <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > Please see this commit in my branch
> >
> >
> https://github.com/andruhon/wicket/commit/f507ae60f183882336b6ca145ab945a6ba9bc94a
> >
> > пт, 3 мая 2019 г. в 16:46, Andrew Kondratev <[email protected]>:
> >
> > > Hi Everyone!
> > >
> > > Today I tried to quickly migrate a wicket-ajax-jquery into a bunch of
> TS
> > > files and made it build into something similar to what was originally
> > > there. Just made it compile and checked that  Wicket.Class.create()
> works
> > > with this example:
> > >
> > > ```
> > >         Wicket.SomethingElse = Wicket.Class.create();
> > >         Wicket.SomethingElse.prototype = {
> > >             initialize: function() {
> > >                 this.message = "HiThere!";
> > >             },
> > >             hi: function() {
> > >                 console.log(this.message);
> > >             }
> > >         };
> > >         var something = new Wicket.SomethingElse();
> > >         something.hi();
> > > ```
> > >
> > > The implementation is still missing some bits and pieces and for sure
> not
> > > optimal, just a proof of concept. Just wanted all you to have a look
> and
> > > think if it worth further time investment.
> > >
> > > чт, 2 мая 2019 г. в 20:58, Andrew Kondratev <[email protected]>:
> > >
> > >> Right, I'll try to toss these objects into separate TS files WITHOUT
> > >> changing anything in implementation to finish with with full
> > compatibility
> > >> with all existing code and tests and will see how it looks like. If
> > result
> > >> will look good we can discuss how the TS transpilation can be properly
> > >> squeezed into the wicket build.
> > >>
> > >> P.S. I don't think that transpilation of this amount of code will take
> > >> longer than 1 or 2 seconds.
> > >>
> > >> чт, 2 мая 2019 г. в 20:51, Martin Terra <
> > [email protected]
> > >> >:
> > >>
> > >>> to 2. toukok. 2019 klo 11.42 Martin Grigorov ([email protected])
> > >>> kirjoitti:
> > >>>
> > >>> > On Thu, May 2, 2019 at 11:17 AM Andrew Kondratev <
> > [email protected]
> > >>> >
> > >>> > wrote:
> > >>> >
> > >>> > > The idea for using TypeScript came into my mind when I was
> > >>> implementing
> > >>> > > custom AjaxBehaviour, because I had a few issues with it:
> > >>> > > 1. The 3000 lines file is not quite a readable thing.
> > >>> > > 2. There's not a lot of intelli sense help when someone trying to
> > >>> > implement
> > >>> > > something. Say it's hard to remember what's the object passed to
> > >>> > > Wicket.Ajax.post, and what's dh in this object, is dh an object
> or
> > a
> > >>> > > function or array of functions, what is ep and so on...
> > >>> > >
> > >>> > > Potentially second can be improved without changing the code
> > itself,
> > >>> by
> > >>> > > implementing d.ts definitions for the file. The first problem can
> > >>> also be
> > >>> > > fixed by placing objects such as Wicket.Log, Wicket.Channel,
> > >>> Wicket.Ajax
> > >>> > > and so on into separate files and then concatenate them somehow
> > into
> > >>> > single
> > >>> > > file.
> > >>> > >
> > >>> >
> > >>> > I start to like the idea!
> > >>> > Let's see what others think.
> > >>> > To convince us more you can create a branch and setup the TS build
> in
> > >>> > wicket-core
> > >>> >
> > >>> >
> > >>> +1
> > >>>
> > >>> >
> > >>> > >
> > >>> > > чт, 2 мая 2019 г. в 18:17, Martin Grigorov <[email protected]
> >:
> > >>> > >
> > >>> > > > Hi,
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > On Thu, May 2, 2019 at 7:02 AM Andrew Kondratev <
> > >>> [email protected]>
> > >>> > > > wrote:
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > Hi Colleagues!
> > >>> > > > >
> > >>> > > > > Are there any plans about refactoring / modernisation of
> > wicket's
> > >>> > > > front-end
> > >>> > > > > code?
> > >>> > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > None that I am aware of.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > >
> > >>> > > > > What comes to my mind:
> > >>> > > > >
> > >>> > > > >    - Start using TypeScript for a new code, so we can have
> type
> > >>> > safety
> > >>> > > on
> > >>> > > > >    the front end side as well. TypeScript is also released
> > under
> > >>> > apache
> > >>> > > > >    license, so I think there should be no licensing issue
> with
> > >>> this.
> > >>> > > > >    Potentially, as a crazy idea Kotlin could also work, but I
> > >>> think
> > >>> > > > > TypeScript
> > >>> > > > >    suits better and requires less effort and learning;
> > >>> > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > I do not see big profit in using TypeScript for Wicket Ajax.
> > >>> > > > Generally I prefer TypeScript over JavaScript, but only for
> > bigger
> > >>> code
> > >>> > > > bases with more often development.
> > >>> > > > wicket-ajax-jquery.js is quite stable in the last several years
> > >>> (since
> > >>> > > > 6.0.0). It is more stable for two main reasons:
> > >>> > > > - we migrated the old vanilla JS code to jQuery based one.
> Note:
> > >>> the
> > >>> > > > vanilla JS version was fragile due to the browser
> > >>> incompatibilities.
> > >>> > > > - we added a *lot* of JS tests !
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > IMO using TypeScript won't add much value. It will only make
> the
> > >>> build
> > >>> > > > process more complex and a bit slower.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > >    - Potentially get rid of jQuery, it's not that useful in
> > 2019
> > >>> > > (wicket
> > >>> > > > >    has recently dropped legacy IE support);
> > >>> > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > This has been suggested by someone else several months ago. But
> > >>> AFAIK
> > >>> > > > nothing has been done so far.
> > >>> > > > The good thing is that one can replace wicket-ajax-jquery.js
> with
> > >>> > > > wicket-ajax-xyz.js in his/her application by using
> > >>> > > >
> > >>>
> application.getJavaScriptLibrarySettings().setWicketAjaxReference(...).
> > >>> > > > So both implementations could be supported by Wicket for some
> > time
> > >>> > with a
> > >>> > > > deprecation cycle for the jQuery based one.
> > >>> > > > These are the requirements I have:
> > >>> > > > - same Wicket.xyz APIs are supported, because this is what the
> > Java
> > >>> > code
> > >>> > > > uses
> > >>> > > > - the test suite still passes
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > >    - Potentially introduce some modern lightweight front-end
> > >>> > framework
> > >>> > > > such
> > >>> > > > >    as ReactJS;
> > >>> > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > What benefits would that bring ?
> > >>> > > > I do not want to use ReactJS just because it is the latest
> > fashion
> > >>> in
> > >>> > JS
> > >>> > > > world.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > >
> > >>> > > > > Sorry if it was already discussed, I searched on
> > >>> > > issues.apache.org/jira
> > >>> > > > > and
> > >>> > > > > didn't find anything relevant. Just wanted to discuss if
> > >>> something
> > >>> > like
> > >>> > > > > this is possible for distant future release. Potentially I
> can
> > >>> > devote a
> > >>> > > > few
> > >>> > > > > hours a week to this.
> > >>> > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > Thanks for the suggestions!
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > >
> > >>> > > > > Have a nice day,
> > >>> > > > > Andrew
> > >>> > > > >
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > >
> > >>> >
> > >>>
> > >>
> >
>

Reply via email to