Ok, I'll do that. The problem probably won't happen in the quickstart
form ;)
why dont you submit a quickstart and then we can figure out why its
happening
-igor
On 11/2/07, Chris Colman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Could it be because the form page is bookmarkable?
thats odd, all
Is there a page with guidelines on making a wicket quickstart?
why dont you submit a quickstart and then we can figure out why its
happening
-igor
On 11/2/07, Chris Colman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Could it be because the form page is bookmarkable?
thats odd, all the values should
On 10/18/07, Otan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
wicket:message does not honor defined namespace (for example, xmlns:w=
http://wicket.apache.org)
With the following markup,
html xmlns= http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml xmlns:w=
http://wicket.apache.org;
...
img src=images/mainmenu-home.jpg
are you really sure that you dont have also an older version somewhere
in the classpath? you can try to start java with -verbose:gc
On 11/2/07, landry soules [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Actually, i didn't go on with maven, since my project is already quite
advanced now, i don't want to reconfigure
And what is the version of your slfj-api.jar?
Erik.
landry soules wrote:
Thanks for your answers, but still no success :
I tried (once again) to use maven to generate a brand new project, but
eclipse freezes when i import the project generated with mvn
eclipse:eclipse
Hi,
I was wondering if it is possible to configure wicket to make
wicket:message output the key in braces when the key is not found (at
least in development mode), because that would make it a lot easier to
spot missing labels...
That is, what I'd like to do is:
wicket:message
When you download jBPM (http://www.jboss.com/products/jbpm/downloads) the
deploy directory contains the jBPM Web Console Application
(http://docs.jboss.com/jbpm/v3/userguide/introduction.html#d0e100) that...
The jBPM console web application serves two purposes. First, it serves as a
central
I was wondering if anyone has started a Wicket project (instead of the
JSF
endorsed one). I would hate to recreate the wheel if someone has
already
started a similar project.
Come on! Recreating the wheel is what us software engineers do best!
Imagine how boring the wheel would be if we hadn't
im afraid we cannot do that. because the contract is that when a
resource is not found we output the body, which is supposed to be the
default text.
to do what you want we need to change that contract. i am not opposed
to that per se, but there needs to be a discussion followed by a vote.
-igor
Moving to the list as suggested by Gwyn.
From Jira issue:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-1108
Maybe I wasn't clear on what my problem with it was.
1) doing any extensive amount of work in a constructor is an anti-pattern
AFAIK.
2) If the API is designed so that I am expected
Ever heard of constructor chaining?
-Matej
On 11/3/07, Brill Pappin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Moving to the list as suggested by Gwyn.
From Jira issue:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-1108
Maybe I wasn't clear on what my problem with it was.
1) doing any extensive amount of
landry soules wrote:
Actually, i didn't go on with maven, since my project is already quite
advanced now, i don't want to reconfigure it to use maven. I just tried to
create a sample project to figure out what is the correct combination of
slf4j/log4j to use (bad idea, since it appears to be
auron wrote:
Sorry to be the wicket newbie, but I was wondering if you guys could help me
to understand how Links work.
I understand that when you do Link(SomePage.class), it calls the zero param
constructor of SomePage, and when you do Link(new SomePage(someParams)) you
can call other
Sebastiaan van Erk wrote:
I was wondering if it is possible to configure wicket to make
wicket:message output the key in braces when the key is not found (at
least in development mode), because that would make it a lot easier to
spot missing labels...
That is, what I'd like to do is:
Brill Pappin wrote:
Moving to the list as suggested by Gwyn.
From Jira issue:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-1108
Maybe I wasn't clear on what my problem with it was.
1) doing any extensive amount of work in a constructor is an anti-pattern
AFAIK.
Blindly declaring
On 11/3/07, William Hoover [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
When you download jBPM (http://www.jboss.com/products/jbpm/downloads) the
deploy directory contains the jBPM Web Console Application
(http://docs.jboss.com/jbpm/v3/userguide/introduction.html#d0e100) that...
The jBPM console web
Thanks for the reply, I was afraid I was going to get this answer. :-) I
can understand it though.
Igor Vaynberg wrote:
im afraid we cannot do that. because the contract is that when a
resource is not found we output the body, which is supposed to be the
default text.
Am I pushing my luck
Mmmm. I must say I agree with this. I'd actually prefer it to throw an
exception. ;-)
I'm surprised we don't do this already!
I would have expected that if
IResourceSettings#getThrowExceptionOnMissingResource returns true, an
exception would be thrown here as well. I think we should fix it.
then you are violating the contract of wicket:message. if we do this
then there is little point to allowing body inside wicket:message
-igor
On 11/3/07, Eelco Hillenius [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mmmm. I must say I agree with this. I'd actually prefer it to throw an
exception. ;-)
I'm
On 11/3/07, Al Maw [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There's nothing to stop you making your constructor call methods to
initialise things that people can then override.
erm. really? while there is nothing stopping you, you clearly shouldnt...
-igor
On Saturday 03 November 2007 01:27:53 Devin Venable wrote:
I've been trying to figure out why when I hit my wicket page, it loads
three times. I discovered this while debugging...my constructor was
called three times for my derived WebPage.
I've captured the call stack produced by the three
On Saturday 03 November 2007 21:18:17 Brill Pappin wrote:
This is a common Java pattern. There should be only one place in the code
where properties are set from a constructor, all other constructors should
pass on their parameters, defaults if required, to the one constructor that
actually
IMHO it does make sense. When I see several different super(...) calls in
constructors the first thing that crosses my mind is that these superclass
constructors have different logic. But it's not true for wicket and in most
Component subclasses I can call super(id, (IModel)null). Can I?
Yep,
Btw, I would mind a decision about this in this weekend, as I'm
finishing the chapter on localization right now :-)
FWIW, I don't like the silent failure we have now, and believe that
using the body as a default isn't very helpful; e.g. if you have the
default body the same as what you intended
On 11/3/07, Dmitry Kandalov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sunday 04 November 2007 01:23:39 Eelco Hillenius wrote:
IMHO it does make sense. When I see several different super(...) calls
in
constructors the first thing that crosses my mind is that these
superclass constructors have
Eelco Hillenius wrote:
Btw, I would mind a decision about this in this weekend, as I'm
finishing the chapter on localization right now :-)
FWIW, I don't like the silent failure we have now, and believe that
using the body as a default isn't very helpful; e.g. if you have the
default body the
Hi,
I have a large application written in WebWork, Spring and iBATIS. After
having started working with Wicket it really pains me that I have to
continue developing with WebWork, so I want to start migrating this
application on a page-by-page basis :)
I'm thinking I'd add a filter for
I have a large application written in WebWork, Spring and iBATIS. After
having started working with Wicket it really pains me that I have to
continue developing with WebWork, so I want to start migrating this
application on a page-by-page basis :)
I'm thinking I'd add a filter for wicket
The easiest solution would be this:
Index:
/Users/eelcohillenius/Documents/workspace_wicket/trunk/jdk-1.4/wicket/src/main/java/org/apache/wicket/markup/resolver/WicketMessageResolver.java
===
---
Yes we could do that. Just remove that default value.
But what i would like to have IF you have a body specified then we don't
throw anything
This way we keep old behavior and we have the new one
Because if i specifiy a body then thats the default value for me. And if not
then i still can see
very
On 11/3/07, Johan Compagner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes we could do that. Just remove that default value.
But what i would like to have IF you have a body specified then we don't
throw anything
This way we keep old behavior and we have the new one
Because if i specifiy a body then thats the
Johan Compagner wrote:
Yes we could do that. Just remove that default value.
But what i would like to have IF you have a body specified then we don't
throw anything
This way we keep old behavior and we have the new one
FWIW, I entirely agree with this. If we just change it for tags that
have
On 11/3/07, Al Maw [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Johan Compagner wrote:
Yes we could do that. Just remove that default value.
But what i would like to have IF you have a body specified then we don't
throw anything
This way we keep old behavior and we have the new one
FWIW, I entirely agree
I don't know how WebWork stores it's sessions, but I imagine they do
that just in the HttpSession, right? So all you need then is knowing
what attribute (keys) are being used. You could write a custom Wicket
session that proxies these, such as:
class MySession extends WebSession {
...
public
Sessions in WebWork are stored in the HttpSession like this:
ActionContext.getContext().getSession().put(key, value);
so this should be trivial. Thanks a lot!
I have never needed to override newRequestCycle() in the WebApplication
class before, and it seems getHttpSession() is not
On 11/3/07, Eelco Hillenius [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sessions in WebWork are stored in the HttpSession like this:
ActionContext.getContext().getSession().put(key, value);
so this should be trivial. Thanks a lot!
I have never needed to override newRequestCycle() in the WebApplication
Perfect!
It worked, and now I just need to create my own AuthorizationStrategy to
check the loggedinUser etc :) Thank you for the super help!
-- Edvin
Eelco Hillenius wrote:
On 11/3/07, Eelco Hillenius [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sessions in WebWork are stored in the HttpSession like this:
Sorry Al, but you lost your money ;-)
I put back slf4j-api-1.4.2.jar , and still the same problem... Using the
jars suggested by Cristi doesn't help either. But since it seems i'm the
only one to still have the problem, must be a problem with my classpath. I
will recheck after deploying the
Probably right.
In the example below, some may argue that the javadoc (here aimed at
sub-classers) on the parent class' constructor could say (as loudly as
possible, but probably never quite loudly enough) that doStuff() is called
before all state is fully initialised (in this case, eye is still
that sb:
final protected Eye getEye(){return eye;}
jweekend wrote:
Probably right.
In the example below, some may argue that the javadoc (here aimed at
sub-classers) on the parent class' constructor could say (as loudly as
possible, but probably never quite loudly enough) that
Yep, you could. Though some constructors in other classes (in or
outside Wicket) might expect not-null arguments passed in in
constructors. It just depends on who implemented it. There is no
golden pattern that everyone follows; if there was, it should probably
be enforced in the
Whatever you set in setInternalErrorPage is ignored if you override
onRuntimeException in a custom request cycle.
Eelco
On 11/1/07, Nino Saturnino Martinez Vazquez Wael
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Appears I was wrong. This is actually working. I would still like to
know if this is the correct way
Im wondering if we(wickeers) would need an integration for a window
manager possibly: http://www.vegui.org/ ? Havent checked it enough to
see how complex it are and how easy it would be to make an simple
integration.
I don't know. It looks fancy, but I wonder how many people will
actually
On Sunday 04 November 2007 02:37:39 Johan Compagner wrote:
You just should call super of the same constructor you are in.
just give the super call everything you got. If you got a model, give it
but you don;t have to you can set it in the constructor with setModel
afterwards.
That's what I
44 matches
Mail list logo
