+1 On Fri, 17 May 2019 at 09:04, Andrew Kondratev <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi everyone! Do you think I should proceed with this > https://github.com/apache/wicket/pull/363 and to try to > incorporate WICKET-6667 into? > > ср, 8 мая 2019 г. в 17:09, Martin Grigorov <[email protected]>: > > > Looks good to me! > > > > On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 2:04 AM Andrew Kondratev <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > 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 > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
-- WBR Maxim aka solomax
