I get the same exception.
The question is why the component is still visible and activated if it 'has
been removed from page'?
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-wicket.1842946.n4.nabble.com/How-to-handle-click-on-removed-links-WicketRuntimeException-Component-xxx-has-been-removed
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-5660
From now on Wicket will throw ComponentNotFoundException instead of the
more generic WicketRuntimeException.
Martin Grigorov
Wicket Training and Consulting
https://twitter.com/mtgrigorov
On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 8:40 PM, Martin Grigorov
Ticket + a quickstart please!
Martin Grigorov
Wicket Training and Consulting
https://twitter.com/mtgrigorov
On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 7:52 PM, Thomas Heigl tho...@umschalt.com wrote:
+1
We're also seeing these sporadically and a custom exception would help a
lot.
Thomas
On Jul 7, 2014
+1
We're also seeing these sporadically and a custom exception would help a
lot.
Thomas
On Jul 7, 2014 10:12 AM, Martin Grigorov mgrigo...@apache.org wrote:
Please create a ticket!
With a patch with the custom exception will make its processing even
faster!
Thank you!
Martin Grigorov
I think the simplest solution for now (until we invent a better one)
is to define a dedicated exception class for such case (similar to
ListenerInvocationNotAllowedException which is raised if user tries
click on disabled links). Then we can catch such exception and handle
it eg. as described by
Please create a ticket!
With a patch with the custom exception will make its processing even faster!
Thank you!
Martin Grigorov
Wicket Training and Consulting
https://twitter.com/mtgrigorov
On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 11:08 AM, Daniel Stoch daniel.st...@gmail.com
wrote:
I think the simplest
Hi all,
I think such question occurs from time to time on this list, but I
have never found a good answer how to solve such problem in general.
The problem is similar to my last question:
Block the UI?
On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 12:13 PM, Daniel Stoch daniel.st...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi all,
I think such question occurs from time to time on this list, but I
have never found a good answer how to solve such problem in general.
The problem is similar to my last question:
So page was rendered in a browser,
on the server component tree was changed
What triggers the change to the component tree? On which thread? Are you using
websockets?
Sven
On 07/04/2014 12:13 PM, Daniel Stoch wrote:
Hi all,
I think such question occurs from time to time on this list, but
This is a popular answer on such querstions (use veil and so on) :).
But it is not the case here, because we do not know whet to block here.
Beside this, in general I think it is not a good solution.
On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 12:30 PM, Ernesto Reinaldo Barreiro
reier...@gmail.com wrote:
Block the
On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 12:33 PM, Sven Meier s...@meiers.net wrote:
So page was rendered in a browser,
on the server component tree was changed
What triggers the change to the component tree? On which thread? Are you
using websockets?
Sven
In general this thread is not initialized by user
Sven's question goes straight to the point: do you know what is causing the
mismacth?
On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 12:44 PM, Daniel Stoch daniel.st...@gmail.com
wrote:
This is a popular answer on such querstions (use veil and so on) :).
But it is not the case here, because we do not know whet to
I have added the appropriate information in that thread.
On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 12:47 PM, Ernesto Reinaldo Barreiro
reier...@gmail.com wrote:
Sven's question goes straight to the point: do you know what is causing the
mismacth?
On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 12:44 PM, Daniel Stoch
Hi,
You can use Atmopshere to hide/disable the client side too, not just the
server side.
Martin Grigorov
Wicket Training and Consulting
https://twitter.com/mtgrigorov
On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 1:46 PM, Daniel Stoch daniel.st...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 12:33 PM, Sven Meier
On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 3:14 PM, Martin Grigorov mgrigo...@apache.org wrote:
Hi,
You can use Atmopshere to hide/disable the client side too, not just the
server side.
Of course, I already do that.
But user can click the link after state was changed on the server side
but before these changes
Why don't you try routing all the click to a part of you application that
is always available? E.g.
1- You have a list of items that are pushed... They are in a certain
container that is always there... At client and server side
2- The items are pushed but instead of normal AJAX link you use link
Maybe you could even just push JSON to client side and generate items
content at client side which is going to be way faster
On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 4:06 PM, Ernesto Reinaldo Barreiro
reier...@gmail.com wrote:
Why don't you try routing all the click to a part of you application that
is always
Sorry, but for me all these solutions are hacks :).
I want to use standard components (eg. AjaxLink) to do simple things.
I don't want to think everywhere how to handle such scenarios. It
should be handled properly on a framework level. I think there is
always possibility that component state on
Hi,
On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 4:59 PM, Daniel Stoch daniel.st...@gmail.com wrote:
Sorry, but for me all these solutions are hacks :).
Why? As far as they are under control... Isn't software development
production controlled hacks? Wicket itself is a hack and so do are
other WEB frameworks like
maybe what is needed is a fail silently ajax request ;-)
On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 5:36 PM, Ernesto Reinaldo Barreiro
reier...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 4:59 PM, Daniel Stoch daniel.st...@gmail.com
wrote:
Sorry, but for me all these solutions are hacks :).
Why? As far
20 matches
Mail list logo
