!
LoadableDetachableModel caches null value if load() fails, bug in
getObject() {attached = true;}
Key: WICKET-5772
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET
() {attached = true;}
Key: WICKET-5772
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-5772
Project: Wicket
Issue Type: Bug
Components
On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 11:38 PM, tsolosche...@apache.org wrote:
Repository: wicket
Updated Branches:
refs/heads/WICKET-5819_Improvements 7343727ce - 7a837f605
WICKET-5819 - renamed readPartially to readBuffered (default true)
Some minor fixes.
Project: http://git-wip-us.apache.org
Am 25.05.15 um 22:51 schrieb Martin Grigorov:
On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 11:38 PM, tsolosche...@apache.org wrote:
Repository: wicket
Updated Branches:
refs/heads/WICKET-5819_Improvements 7343727ce - 7a837f605
WICKET-5819 - renamed readPartially to readBuffered (default true)
Some minor
could it have to call
isAttached() in load()?
Probably none, I'm playing devil's advocate here. It is one model we
promote heavily to our users so I imagine it being quite popular. What
could break if we move the attached = true; and people rely on it to
be true at the beginning of load()?
I
advocate here. It is one model we
promote heavily to our users so I imagine it being quite popular. What
could break if we move the attached = true; and people rely on it to
be true at the beginning of load()?
I also don't see a use case for relying on attached being true during
load
isAttached() in load()?
Probably none, I'm playing devil's advocate here. It is one model we
promote heavily to our users so I imagine it being quite popular. What
could break if we move the attached = true; and people rely on it to
be true at the beginning of load()?
I also don't see a use
calling #load(), as suggested.
Thanks Martin!
LoadableDetachableModel caches null value if load() fails, bug in
getObject() {attached = true;}
Key: WICKET-5772
URL
Hi Martin,
isAttached() is a public method and it is valid to call inside load()
that's a valid point to consider: But what purpose could it have to call
isAttached() in load()?
It would return true during the complete invocation.
Since Wicket allows a single thread only to access
http://java.dzone.com/news/closures-coming-java-7 -
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=ddhp95vd_6hg3qhc
then that would pretty much solve our none static typed property model in
java 7
meanwhile i am working on bindgen.org to make it play nice with wicket.
-igor
On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 3:38 PM, Johan Compagner jcompag...@gmail.com wrote:
http://java.dzone.com/news/closures-coming-java-7 -
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=ddhp95vd_6hg3qhc
then that would pretty much solve our
Exactly my words! You can always make stuff slow and memory consuming:)
2009/10/14 Michael Mosmann mich...@mosmann.de
Anyway, for now this is just an unsubstantiated claim. Could I write a
Wicket application that was slow and hard to scale? ABSOLUTELY! Could I
write one that was fast
maybe he can tell us which committers, because so far we are lost...
-igor
On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 12:14 AM, Maarten Bosteels
mbosteels@gmail.com wrote:
clients that had trouble getting Wicket to scale, and they even hired
committers to try to fix
Is it a statement about Wicket or about
Don't know anything about it.
Anyone else?
-Matej
On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 7:47 PM, Martin Funk mafulaf...@googlemail.com wrote:
http://twitter.com/mraible/status/4860957884
Me either.
--
Jeremy Thomerson
http://www.wickettraining.com
On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 12:52 PM, Matej Knopp matej.kn...@gmail.com wrote:
Don't know anything about it.
Anyone else?
-Matej
On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 7:47 PM, Martin Funk mafulaf...@googlemail.com
wrote:
Here it was:
http://techblog.molindo.at/2009/09/wicketstuff-merged-resources-new-much-simpler-version.html
2009/10/14 Jeremy Thomerson jer...@wickettraining.com:
Me either.
--
Jeremy Thomerson
http://www.wickettraining.com
On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 12:52 PM, Matej Knopp
On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 12:59 PM, Martin Makundi
martin.maku...@koodaripalvelut.com wrote:
It's not the fastest...
[CITATION NEEDED]
--
Jeremy Thomerson
http://www.wickettraining.com
Don't know anything about it.
Anyone else?
Not me. I don't think anyone of the core team was hired for an
optimization job or we'd surely have had a discussion about it.
Eelco
Hey Matt, if you're reading with us, maybe you can explain the
scalability issues you ran into? How many concurrent sessions did you
need to be able to handle? What did you try when optimizing?
Cheers,
Eelco
On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 2:26 PM, Eelco Hillenius
eelco.hillen...@gmail.com wrote:
it was:
http://techblog.molindo.at/2009/09/wicketstuff-merged-resources-new-much-simpler-version.html
2009/10/14 Jeremy Thomerson jer...@wickettraining.com:
Me either.
--
Jeremy Thomerson
http://www.wickettraining.com
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/True
On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 9:16 PM, dtoffe dto...@yahoo.com.ar wrote:
Perhaps this is the original report of performance problems:
http://techblog.molindo.at/2008/08/wicket-interface-speed-up.html
That's hardly a scalability issue.
-Matej
Yeah - the resources thing can't be what Matt was talking about. That
doesn't have anything to do with scalability, and is easily solved in quite
a few different ways.
Anyway, for now this is just an unsubstantiated claim. Could I write a
Wicket application that was slow and hard to scale?
According to IBehavior.isTemporary() javadoc, behaviors that do Javascript
effects etc.
In which case should AbstractAjaxBehavior.isTemporary() return true ? Or is
there a valid reason for it to return false?
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Should
[x ] setRequired(true) means the Checkbox has a value (always the case).
On Feb 1, 2008 4:52 AM, Kent Tong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
What is the meaning of setRequired(true) on a Checkbox? Some interpret
it as requiring that the Checkbox be checked. Some interpret that it
requires
[ ] setRequired(true) means the Checkbox is checked.
[x] setRequired(true) means the Checkbox has a value (always the case).
Frank
[x] setRequired(true) means the Checkbox has a value (always the case).
On 2/1/08, Kent Tong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
What is the meaning of setRequired(true) on a Checkbox? Some interpret
it as requiring that the Checkbox be checked. Some interpret that it
requires that the Checkbox
Kent Tong wrote:
So, please vote:
[ ] setRequired(true) means the Checkbox is checked.
[ ] setRequired(true) means the Checkbox has a value (always the case).
[x] setRequired(true) means the Checkbox has a value (always the case).
-
--
Kent Tong
Wicket tutorials freely available
Will the javadocs then indicate that Required is meaningless for a Checkbox
and does not correspond to the Checked value?
Hi,
What is the meaning of setRequired(true) on a Checkbox? Some interpret
it as requiring that the Checkbox be checked. Some interpret that it
requires that the Checkbox have a value (which is always the case). See
http://www.nabble.com/%22required%22-for-Checkbox-ts14662131.html#a14680214
What is the meaning of setRequired(true) on a Checkbox? Some interpret
it as requiring that the Checkbox be checked. Some interpret that it
requires that the Checkbox have a value (which is always the case). See
http://www.nabble.com/%22required%22-for-Checkbox-ts14662131.html#a14680214
[ ] setRequired(true) means the Checkbox is checked.
[ x ] setRequired(true) means the Checkbox has a value (always the case).
2008/2/1, Kent Tong [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hi,
What is the meaning of setRequired(true) on a Checkbox? Some interpret
it as requiring that the Checkbox be checked
31 matches
Mail list logo
