Re: Behavior#onTag() doesn't have the Component

2016-12-05 Thread Martin Grigorov 
Changed with https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-6293

Martin Grigorov
Wicket Training and Consulting
https://twitter.com/mtgrigorov

On Sun, Dec 4, 2016 at 10:17 PM, Sven Meier  wrote:

> Hi Martin,
>
> > It is shorter with three chars "c, ".
>
> .. and two /parentheses. /I though you knew of a shorter lambda syntax I
> wasn't aware of.
>
> I'm fine with a single method, at least it's consistent with
> #onComponentTag() this way.
>
> Have fun
> Sven
>
>
>
> On 04.12.2016 14:26, Martin Grigorov wrote:
>
>> Hi Sven
>>
>> label1.add(Behavior.onTag(t->t.put(key, label1.getId())); // 58
>> characters
>> label1.add(Behavior.onTag((c, t)->t.put(key, label1.getId()));   // 63
>> charactes
>>
>> "I'd like to preserve the first one because it's syntactically shorter."
>>
>> I thought that you say that the first example is much shorter than the
>> second and that's why you prefer to keep it.
>> It is just five 5 characters shorter. And all of them are auto-suggested
>> by
>> my IDE.
>> My IDE actually auggests
>> label1.add(Behavior.onTag((component, tag)-> {_}));   // _ is the cursor
>> position
>>
>> Or you meant something else ?
>>
>>
>> Martin Grigorov
>> Wicket Training and Consulting
>> https://twitter.com/mtgrigorov
>>
>> On Sat, Dec 3, 2016 at 3:46 PM, Sven Meier  wrote:
>>
>> It is shorter with three chars "c, "

>>> Can you explain how that works?
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Sven
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 03.12.2016 12:36, Martin Grigorov wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sat, Dec 3, 2016 at 12:20 PM, Sven Meier  wrote:

 Hi,

> I see your point.
>
> We could have both:
>
> label1.add(Behavior.onTag(t->t.put(key, label1.getId()));
> label1.add(Behavior.onTag((c, t)->t.put(key, c.getId()));
>
> Both the Eclipse and JDK compiler accept these.
> The component should come as first argument as in
> Behavior#onComponentTag(Component, ComponentTag) though.
>
> I'd like to preserve the first one because it's syntactically shorter.
>
> It is shorter with three chars  "c, ". IMO one method is enough. The
> IDE
>
 helps anyway.


 Have fun

> Sven
>
>
>
> On 02.12.2016 17:58, Martijn Dashorst wrote:
>
> But it would add another reference to the component, increasing the
>
>> footprint. It also enables you to 'bind' to another (unintended)
>> component that's available in the scope.
>>
>> Label label1 = new Label(...);
>> ...
>> Label label4 = new Label(...);
>>
>> label1.add(Behavior.onTag(t->t.put(key, label4.getId()));
>>
>>
>> When supplying the component as a second parameter in the onTag, you
>> direct the developer to know what the intention is:
>>
>> label1.add(Behavior.onTag(t,c -> t.put(key, c.getId()));
>>
>> Martijn
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 9:27 PM, Sven Meier  wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>>> the behavior is added to a single component only and readily
>>> available
>>> anyway in scope:
>>>
>>>component.add(onTag(tag -> tag.put(key, component.getId()));
>>>
>>> What do we gain when the same component is  given as argument?
>>>
>>>component.add(onTag(component, tag -> tag.put(key,
>>> component.getId(;
>>>
>>> Note that the first component has a better type, the argument would
>>> just
>>> be
>>> a Component:
>>>
>>>foo.add(onTag(tag -> tag.put(key, foo.getBar(;
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> Sven
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 25.11.2016 20:51, Martin Grigorov wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
 At Martijn's slides from ApacheCon [1] I've noticed that critiques
 he
 mention is that org.apache.wicket.behavior.Behavior#onTag() uses
 SerializableConsumer and ignores the Component
 parameter.
 I agree that having the component would be handy!

 Any good reasons why it should be like this ?

 1.

 http://events.linuxfoundation.org/sites/events/files/slides/
 Whats%20up%20with%20Wicket%208%20and%20Java%208.pdf


 Martin Grigorov
 Wicket Training and Consulting
 https://twitter.com/mtgrigorov




>

Re: Behavior#onTag() doesn't have the Component

2016-12-04 Thread Sven Meier 

Hi Martin,

> It is shorter with three chars "c, ".

.. and two /parentheses. /I though you knew of a shorter lambda syntax I 
wasn't aware of.


I'm fine with a single method, at least it's consistent with 
#onComponentTag() this way.


Have fun
Sven


On 04.12.2016 14:26, Martin Grigorov wrote:

Hi Sven

label1.add(Behavior.onTag(t->t.put(key, label1.getId())); // 58
characters
label1.add(Behavior.onTag((c, t)->t.put(key, label1.getId()));   // 63
charactes

"I'd like to preserve the first one because it's syntactically shorter."

I thought that you say that the first example is much shorter than the
second and that's why you prefer to keep it.
It is just five 5 characters shorter. And all of them are auto-suggested by
my IDE.
My IDE actually auggests
label1.add(Behavior.onTag((component, tag)-> {_}));   // _ is the cursor
position

Or you meant something else ?


Martin Grigorov
Wicket Training and Consulting
https://twitter.com/mtgrigorov

On Sat, Dec 3, 2016 at 3:46 PM, Sven Meier  wrote:


It is shorter with three chars "c, "

Can you explain how that works?

Thanks
Sven



On 03.12.2016 12:36, Martin Grigorov wrote:


On Sat, Dec 3, 2016 at 12:20 PM, Sven Meier  wrote:

Hi,

I see your point.

We could have both:

label1.add(Behavior.onTag(t->t.put(key, label1.getId()));
label1.add(Behavior.onTag((c, t)->t.put(key, c.getId()));

Both the Eclipse and JDK compiler accept these.
The component should come as first argument as in
Behavior#onComponentTag(Component, ComponentTag) though.

I'd like to preserve the first one because it's syntactically shorter.

It is shorter with three chars  "c, ". IMO one method is enough. The IDE

helps anyway.


Have fun

Sven



On 02.12.2016 17:58, Martijn Dashorst wrote:

But it would add another reference to the component, increasing the

footprint. It also enables you to 'bind' to another (unintended)
component that's available in the scope.

Label label1 = new Label(...);
...
Label label4 = new Label(...);

label1.add(Behavior.onTag(t->t.put(key, label4.getId()));


When supplying the component as a second parameter in the onTag, you
direct the developer to know what the intention is:

label1.add(Behavior.onTag(t,c -> t.put(key, c.getId()));

Martijn




On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 9:27 PM, Sven Meier  wrote:

Hi,

the behavior is added to a single component only and readily available
anyway in scope:

   component.add(onTag(tag -> tag.put(key, component.getId()));

What do we gain when the same component is  given as argument?

   component.add(onTag(component, tag -> tag.put(key,
component.getId(;

Note that the first component has a better type, the argument would
just
be
a Component:

   foo.add(onTag(tag -> tag.put(key, foo.getBar(;

Regards
Sven



On 25.11.2016 20:51, Martin Grigorov wrote:

Hi,

At Martijn's slides from ApacheCon [1] I've noticed that critiques he
mention is that org.apache.wicket.behavior.Behavior#onTag() uses
SerializableConsumer and ignores the Component
parameter.
I agree that having the component would be handy!

Any good reasons why it should be like this ?

1.

http://events.linuxfoundation.org/sites/events/files/slides/
Whats%20up%20with%20Wicket%208%20and%20Java%208.pdf


Martin Grigorov
Wicket Training and Consulting
https://twitter.com/mtgrigorov

Re: Behavior#onTag() doesn't have the Component

2016-12-04 Thread Martin Grigorov 
Hi Sven

label1.add(Behavior.onTag(t->t.put(key, label1.getId())); // 58
characters
label1.add(Behavior.onTag((c, t)->t.put(key, label1.getId()));   // 63
charactes

"I'd like to preserve the first one because it's syntactically shorter."

I thought that you say that the first example is much shorter than the
second and that's why you prefer to keep it.
It is just five 5 characters shorter. And all of them are auto-suggested by
my IDE.
My IDE actually auggests
label1.add(Behavior.onTag((component, tag)-> {_}));   // _ is the cursor
position

Or you meant something else ?


Martin Grigorov
Wicket Training and Consulting
https://twitter.com/mtgrigorov

On Sat, Dec 3, 2016 at 3:46 PM, Sven Meier  wrote:

> >It is shorter with three chars "c, "
>
> Can you explain how that works?
>
> Thanks
> Sven
>
>
>
> On 03.12.2016 12:36, Martin Grigorov wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Dec 3, 2016 at 12:20 PM, Sven Meier  wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I see your point.
>>>
>>> We could have both:
>>>
>>>label1.add(Behavior.onTag(t->t.put(key, label1.getId()));
>>>label1.add(Behavior.onTag((c, t)->t.put(key, c.getId()));
>>>
>>> Both the Eclipse and JDK compiler accept these.
>>> The component should come as first argument as in
>>> Behavior#onComponentTag(Component, ComponentTag) though.
>>>
>>> I'd like to preserve the first one because it's syntactically shorter.
>>>
>>> It is shorter with three chars  "c, ". IMO one method is enough. The IDE
>> helps anyway.
>>
>>
>> Have fun
>>> Sven
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 02.12.2016 17:58, Martijn Dashorst wrote:
>>>
>>> But it would add another reference to the component, increasing the
 footprint. It also enables you to 'bind' to another (unintended)
 component that's available in the scope.

 Label label1 = new Label(...);
 ...
 Label label4 = new Label(...);

 label1.add(Behavior.onTag(t->t.put(key, label4.getId()));


 When supplying the component as a second parameter in the onTag, you
 direct the developer to know what the intention is:

 label1.add(Behavior.onTag(t,c -> t.put(key, c.getId()));

 Martijn




 On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 9:27 PM, Sven Meier  wrote:

 Hi,
>
> the behavior is added to a single component only and readily available
> anyway in scope:
>
>   component.add(onTag(tag -> tag.put(key, component.getId()));
>
> What do we gain when the same component is  given as argument?
>
>   component.add(onTag(component, tag -> tag.put(key,
> component.getId(;
>
> Note that the first component has a better type, the argument would
> just
> be
> a Component:
>
>   foo.add(onTag(tag -> tag.put(key, foo.getBar(;
>
> Regards
> Sven
>
>
>
> On 25.11.2016 20:51, Martin Grigorov wrote:
>
> Hi,
>>
>> At Martijn's slides from ApacheCon [1] I've noticed that critiques he
>> mention is that org.apache.wicket.behavior.Behavior#onTag() uses
>> SerializableConsumer and ignores the Component
>> parameter.
>> I agree that having the component would be handy!
>>
>> Any good reasons why it should be like this ?
>>
>> 1.
>>
>> http://events.linuxfoundation.org/sites/events/files/slides/
>> Whats%20up%20with%20Wicket%208%20and%20Java%208.pdf
>>
>>
>> Martin Grigorov
>> Wicket Training and Consulting
>> https://twitter.com/mtgrigorov
>>
>>
>>

>

Re: Behavior#onTag() doesn't have the Component

2016-12-03 Thread Sven Meier 

>It is shorter with three chars "c, "

Can you explain how that works?

Thanks
Sven


On 03.12.2016 12:36, Martin Grigorov wrote:

On Sat, Dec 3, 2016 at 12:20 PM, Sven Meier  wrote:


Hi,

I see your point.

We could have both:

   label1.add(Behavior.onTag(t->t.put(key, label1.getId()));
   label1.add(Behavior.onTag((c, t)->t.put(key, c.getId()));

Both the Eclipse and JDK compiler accept these.
The component should come as first argument as in
Behavior#onComponentTag(Component, ComponentTag) though.

I'd like to preserve the first one because it's syntactically shorter.


It is shorter with three chars  "c, ". IMO one method is enough. The IDE
helps anyway.



Have fun
Sven



On 02.12.2016 17:58, Martijn Dashorst wrote:


But it would add another reference to the component, increasing the
footprint. It also enables you to 'bind' to another (unintended)
component that's available in the scope.

Label label1 = new Label(...);
...
Label label4 = new Label(...);

label1.add(Behavior.onTag(t->t.put(key, label4.getId()));


When supplying the component as a second parameter in the onTag, you
direct the developer to know what the intention is:

label1.add(Behavior.onTag(t,c -> t.put(key, c.getId()));

Martijn




On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 9:27 PM, Sven Meier  wrote:


Hi,

the behavior is added to a single component only and readily available
anyway in scope:

  component.add(onTag(tag -> tag.put(key, component.getId()));

What do we gain when the same component is  given as argument?

  component.add(onTag(component, tag -> tag.put(key,
component.getId(;

Note that the first component has a better type, the argument would just
be
a Component:

  foo.add(onTag(tag -> tag.put(key, foo.getBar(;

Regards
Sven



On 25.11.2016 20:51, Martin Grigorov wrote:


Hi,

At Martijn's slides from ApacheCon [1] I've noticed that critiques he
mention is that org.apache.wicket.behavior.Behavior#onTag() uses
SerializableConsumer and ignores the Component parameter.
I agree that having the component would be handy!

Any good reasons why it should be like this ?

1.

http://events.linuxfoundation.org/sites/events/files/slides/
Whats%20up%20with%20Wicket%208%20and%20Java%208.pdf


Martin Grigorov
Wicket Training and Consulting
https://twitter.com/mtgrigorov

Re: Behavior#onTag() doesn't have the Component

2016-12-03 Thread Martin Grigorov 
On Sat, Dec 3, 2016 at 12:20 PM, Sven Meier  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I see your point.
>
> We could have both:
>
>   label1.add(Behavior.onTag(t->t.put(key, label1.getId()));
>   label1.add(Behavior.onTag((c, t)->t.put(key, c.getId()));
>
> Both the Eclipse and JDK compiler accept these.
> The component should come as first argument as in
> Behavior#onComponentTag(Component, ComponentTag) though.
>
> I'd like to preserve the first one because it's syntactically shorter.
>

It is shorter with three chars  "c, ". IMO one method is enough. The IDE
helps anyway.


>
> Have fun
> Sven
>
>
>
> On 02.12.2016 17:58, Martijn Dashorst wrote:
>
>> But it would add another reference to the component, increasing the
>> footprint. It also enables you to 'bind' to another (unintended)
>> component that's available in the scope.
>>
>> Label label1 = new Label(...);
>> ...
>> Label label4 = new Label(...);
>>
>> label1.add(Behavior.onTag(t->t.put(key, label4.getId()));
>>
>>
>> When supplying the component as a second parameter in the onTag, you
>> direct the developer to know what the intention is:
>>
>> label1.add(Behavior.onTag(t,c -> t.put(key, c.getId()));
>>
>> Martijn
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 9:27 PM, Sven Meier  wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> the behavior is added to a single component only and readily available
>>> anyway in scope:
>>>
>>>  component.add(onTag(tag -> tag.put(key, component.getId()));
>>>
>>> What do we gain when the same component is  given as argument?
>>>
>>>  component.add(onTag(component, tag -> tag.put(key,
>>> component.getId(;
>>>
>>> Note that the first component has a better type, the argument would just
>>> be
>>> a Component:
>>>
>>>  foo.add(onTag(tag -> tag.put(key, foo.getBar(;
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> Sven
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 25.11.2016 20:51, Martin Grigorov wrote:
>>>
 Hi,

 At Martijn's slides from ApacheCon [1] I've noticed that critiques he
 mention is that org.apache.wicket.behavior.Behavior#onTag() uses
 SerializableConsumer and ignores the Component parameter.
 I agree that having the component would be handy!

 Any good reasons why it should be like this ?

 1.

 http://events.linuxfoundation.org/sites/events/files/slides/
 Whats%20up%20with%20Wicket%208%20and%20Java%208.pdf


 Martin Grigorov
 Wicket Training and Consulting
 https://twitter.com/mtgrigorov


>>
>>
>

Re: Behavior#onTag() doesn't have the Component

2016-12-03 Thread Sven Meier 

Hi,

I see your point.

We could have both:

  label1.add(Behavior.onTag(t->t.put(key, label1.getId()));
  label1.add(Behavior.onTag((c, t)->t.put(key, c.getId()));

Both the Eclipse and JDK compiler accept these.
The component should come as first argument as in 
Behavior#onComponentTag(Component, ComponentTag) though.

I'd like to preserve the first one because it's syntactically shorter.

Have fun
Sven
  



On 02.12.2016 17:58, Martijn Dashorst wrote:

But it would add another reference to the component, increasing the
footprint. It also enables you to 'bind' to another (unintended)
component that's available in the scope.

Label label1 = new Label(...);
...
Label label4 = new Label(...);

label1.add(Behavior.onTag(t->t.put(key, label4.getId()));


When supplying the component as a second parameter in the onTag, you
direct the developer to know what the intention is:

label1.add(Behavior.onTag(t,c -> t.put(key, c.getId()));

Martijn




On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 9:27 PM, Sven Meier  wrote:

Hi,

the behavior is added to a single component only and readily available
anyway in scope:

 component.add(onTag(tag -> tag.put(key, component.getId()));

What do we gain when the same component is  given as argument?

 component.add(onTag(component, tag -> tag.put(key, component.getId(;

Note that the first component has a better type, the argument would just be
a Component:

 foo.add(onTag(tag -> tag.put(key, foo.getBar(;

Regards
Sven



On 25.11.2016 20:51, Martin Grigorov wrote:

Hi,

At Martijn's slides from ApacheCon [1] I've noticed that critiques he
mention is that org.apache.wicket.behavior.Behavior#onTag() uses
SerializableConsumer and ignores the Component parameter.
I agree that having the component would be handy!

Any good reasons why it should be like this ?

1.

http://events.linuxfoundation.org/sites/events/files/slides/Whats%20up%20with%20Wicket%208%20and%20Java%208.pdf


Martin Grigorov
Wicket Training and Consulting
https://twitter.com/mtgrigorov

Re: Behavior#onTag() doesn't have the Component

2016-12-02 Thread Martijn Dashorst 
But it would add another reference to the component, increasing the
footprint. It also enables you to 'bind' to another (unintended)
component that's available in the scope.

Label label1 = new Label(...);
...
Label label4 = new Label(...);

label1.add(Behavior.onTag(t->t.put(key, label4.getId()));


When supplying the component as a second parameter in the onTag, you
direct the developer to know what the intention is:

label1.add(Behavior.onTag(t,c -> t.put(key, c.getId()));

Martijn




On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 9:27 PM, Sven Meier  wrote:
> Hi,
>
> the behavior is added to a single component only and readily available
> anyway in scope:
>
> component.add(onTag(tag -> tag.put(key, component.getId()));
>
> What do we gain when the same component is  given as argument?
>
> component.add(onTag(component, tag -> tag.put(key, component.getId(;
>
> Note that the first component has a better type, the argument would just be
> a Component:
>
> foo.add(onTag(tag -> tag.put(key, foo.getBar(;
>
> Regards
> Sven
>
>
>
> On 25.11.2016 20:51, Martin Grigorov wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> At Martijn's slides from ApacheCon [1] I've noticed that critiques he
>> mention is that org.apache.wicket.behavior.Behavior#onTag() uses
>> SerializableConsumer and ignores the Component parameter.
>> I agree that having the component would be handy!
>>
>> Any good reasons why it should be like this ?
>>
>> 1.
>>
>> http://events.linuxfoundation.org/sites/events/files/slides/Whats%20up%20with%20Wicket%208%20and%20Java%208.pdf
>>
>>
>> Martin Grigorov
>> Wicket Training and Consulting
>> https://twitter.com/mtgrigorov
>>
>



-- 
Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com

Re: Behavior#onTag() doesn't have the Component

2016-12-01 Thread Martin Grigorov 
Agreed!
Thanks!

Martin Grigorov
Wicket Training and Consulting
https://twitter.com/mtgrigorov

On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 9:27 PM, Sven Meier  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> the behavior is added to a single component only and readily available
> anyway in scope:
>
> component.add(onTag(tag -> tag.put(key, component.getId()));
>
> What do we gain when the same component is  given as argument?
>
> component.add(onTag(component, tag -> tag.put(key,
> component.getId(;
>
> Note that the first component has a better type, the argument would just
> be a Component:
>
> foo.add(onTag(tag -> tag.put(key, foo.getBar(;
>
> Regards
> Sven
>
>
>
> On 25.11.2016 20:51, Martin Grigorov wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> At Martijn's slides from ApacheCon [1] I've noticed that critiques he
>> mention is that org.apache.wicket.behavior.Behavior#onTag() uses
>> SerializableConsumer and ignores the Component parameter.
>> I agree that having the component would be handy!
>>
>> Any good reasons why it should be like this ?
>>
>> 1.
>> http://events.linuxfoundation.org/sites/events/files/slides/
>> Whats%20up%20with%20Wicket%208%20and%20Java%208.pdf
>>
>>
>> Martin Grigorov
>> Wicket Training and Consulting
>> https://twitter.com/mtgrigorov
>>
>>
>

Re: Behavior#onTag() doesn't have the Component

2016-11-25 Thread Sven Meier 

Hi,

the behavior is added to a single component only and readily available 
anyway in scope:


component.add(onTag(tag -> tag.put(key, component.getId()));

What do we gain when the same component is  given as argument?

component.add(onTag(component, tag -> tag.put(key, 
component.getId(;


Note that the first component has a better type, the argument would just 
be a Component:


foo.add(onTag(tag -> tag.put(key, foo.getBar(;

Regards
Sven


On 25.11.2016 20:51, Martin Grigorov wrote:

Hi,

At Martijn's slides from ApacheCon [1] I've noticed that critiques he
mention is that org.apache.wicket.behavior.Behavior#onTag() uses
SerializableConsumer and ignores the Component parameter.
I agree that having the component would be handy!

Any good reasons why it should be like this ?

1.
http://events.linuxfoundation.org/sites/events/files/slides/Whats%20up%20with%20Wicket%208%20and%20Java%208.pdf


Martin Grigorov
Wicket Training and Consulting
https://twitter.com/mtgrigorov