On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 8:54 PM, Jonathan Ferguson wrote:
> If we are using Actors for non Comet based stuff I assume we are free to
> leave them as is as long as we don't come asking for support ?
Absolutely. Use the Actor library that best suits your needs.
>
> I am thinking about moving th
If we are using Actors for non Comet based stuff I assume we are free to
leave them as is as long as we don't come asking for support ?
I am thinking about moving through switching them over, but I'd like to do
it at a leisurely pace.
Jono
2009/10/23 David Pollak
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 6:03 PM, ssid wrote:
>
> Hi all,
> I'm using XMPP in my little LiftApp and tried to migrate my code to
> the new Lift Actors.
> Somehow it seems that net.liftweb.xmpp still uses Scala Actors.
> Is this intentional or about to change?
>
I was lazy and didn't make that chan
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 6:28 PM, Jim Barrows wrote:
> RrttrRrrrtrtrtrrrtrtrtrrttÞ
>
bless you.
> Sent on the Now Network™ from my Sprint® BlackBerry
>
> -Original Message-
> From: ssid
> Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2009 18:03:25
> To: Lift
> Subject: [L
RrttrRrrrtrtrtrrrtrtrtrrttÞ
Sent on the Now Network™ from my Sprint® BlackBerry
-Original Message-
From: ssid
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2009 18:03:25
To: Lift
Subject: [Lift] Re: **Breaking Changes** **README** **Important**
Hi all,
I'm using XMPP in my little LiftApp and tri
Hi all,
I'm using XMPP in my little LiftApp and tried to migrate my code to
the new Lift Actors.
Somehow it seems that net.liftweb.xmpp still uses Scala Actors.
Is this intentional or about to change?
If not is it possible that Scala Actors communicate with Lift Actors?
At the moment I don't get m
Thanks Dan, I will try that.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Lift" group.
To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
liftweb+unsubscr.
Code for our app now compiles. Needed to replace Actor with
LiftActor. Also, needed to define the messageHandler partial
function.
So, George, I think the answer to your question is:
object LocalSmtp extends Actor
becomes
object LocalSmtp extends LiftActor
Dan
On Oct 22, 11:19 am, Dano w
I did a quick check in the lift sources and could not find example or
test code for the new LiftActors. Perhaps additions to these areas
would help those that are trying to convert their Actor code.
Thanks in advance for any help for those still struggling to make the
conversion.
Dan
On Oct 2
It would be good to have an example like George's verified as it is
not clear how to convert our Actor code.
Dan
On Oct 22, 4:48 am, george wrote:
> ok so..
>
> object LocalSmtp extends Actor
>
> should become
>
> object LocalSmtp extends GenericActor[LocalSmtp]
>
> ?
--~--~-~--~~
ok so..
object LocalSmtp extends Actor
should become
object LocalSmtp extends GenericActor[LocalSmtp]
?
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Lift" group.
To post to this group, send email to liftweb@g
Guys,
> Prior to the changes, I had a function "def registerActor(act:
> Actor) which could handle both scala Actor as well as CometActor,; now
> if I change this to "def registerActor(act: GenericActor)" it throws
> compilation error asking to a type to be specified for the
> GenericActor. Wh
DPP (and I) recommend just doing schedule and then re-schedule after message
recieved.
schedule(actor,MyMsg(),3 seconds)
in the actor
{
case MyMsg() => {
doMyStuff
schedule(this,MyMsg(),3 seconds)
}
}
Makes sense?
On Thu, O
> - Secondly, I also get compilation error for calling
> scheduleAtFixedRate method on ActorPing. Says no such method. Has this
> method been deprecated and if so, what is the method I should be
> calling instead?
I have this problem also.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
Yo
Hi,
I've a few question regarding the changes made.
- Firstly, with the changes made, how do I have a method which can now
accept both scala Actor as well as a CometActor??
Prior to the changes, I had a function "def registerActor(act:
Actor) which could handle both scala Actor as well as CometA
You're right, my bad - an old pom was looking at the wrong repo, all happy
now.
Cheers
Jono
2009/10/22 David Pollak
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 10:27 PM, Jonathan Ferguson wrote:
>
>> Do we need to update our pom's or should it be code changes only ?
>
>
> You likely only need to make the cod
Code change should suffice.
pom.xml updates won't be necessary since lift-util has lift-common as
dependency and your application (which must be having lift-util as
dependency) would resolve the lift-common dependency transitively.
Cheers, Indrajit
On 22/10/09 10:57 AM, Jonathan Ferguson wrot
On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 10:27 PM, Jonathan Ferguson wrote:
> Do we need to update our pom's or should it be code changes only ?
You likely only need to make the code change... at least that's been the
case for all the projects I've converted.
>
> Cheers
>
> Jono
>
> 2009/10/22 David Pollak
>
Do we need to update our pom's or should it be code changes only ?
Cheers
Jono
2009/10/22 David Pollak
> Folks,
> As the title of this email indicates, there are breaking changes in Lift
> that just got pushed to master.
>
> We've migrated from Scala Actors to Lift Actors and included a series
19 matches
Mail list logo