The problem is that i am using only AbstractCalendar object, because I need
to use YUI CalendarGroup object and show multiple page calendar in page,
every page has only a few available cells for users to pick date of event.
2010/11/9 Igor Vaynberg igor.vaynb...@gmail.com
the value should be
Again, the point is (regardless of unit tests) that you can
unknowingly do something that allows stuff to break later quite
easily.
I wouldn't call it unknowingly if you are stating it now before the
feature has been implemented.
**
Martin
On the other hand if you only have to do component nesting
programmatically in case of functional reasons (like security) your code
will probably much cleaner and you'll realize issues like using the
wrong parent faster.
Instead of:
myComponent.add(child1)
child1.add(child2)
On the other hand if you only have to do component nesting programmatically
in case of functional reasons (like security) your code will probably much
cleaner and you'll realize issues like using the wrong parent faster.
+1
Very good point: cleaner code! Finally complex wicket pages will
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 12:29 PM, Martin Makundi
martin.maku...@koodaripalvelut.com wrote:
I wouldn't call it unknowingly if you are stating it now before the
feature has been implemented.
The user can queue stuff to the wrong component unknowingly because
they won't get an exception. Then
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 12:33 PM, Martin Makundi
martin.maku...@koodaripalvelut.com wrote:
Very good point: cleaner code! Finally complex wicket pages will look
like their hello-world counterparts.
You're becoming a bit irrational here, Martin. Let's try to stay on
point. He brings up a
The user can queue stuff to the wrong component unknowingly because
they won't get an exception.
You will get an exception if you queue explicitly to the wrong
component. If you don't care about the parent component, it 's their
choie (good or bad) ;)
Then later a markup change could
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 12:38 PM, Martin Makundi
martin.maku...@koodaripalvelut.com wrote:
You will get an exception if you queue explicitly to the wrong
component. If you don't care about the parent component, it 's their
choie (good or bad) ;)
You're not understanding what I'm saying. I'm
You're not understanding what I'm saying. I'm saying they're not
consciously making a *choice*; they're queueing the component to the
wrong parent on accident, but they aren't getting an exception. This
can lead to problems later on.
So you mean that if a manufacturer manufactures a gun
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 12:43 PM, Martin Makundi
martin.maku...@koodaripalvelut.com wrote:
So you mean that if a manufacturer manufactures a gun they are not
conciously making the decision that somebody is getting shot?
Ok, I'm officially done with this conversation. I've voiced my
opinion.
Very good point: cleaner code! Finally complex wicket pages will look
like their hello-world counterparts.
You're becoming a bit irrational here, Martin. Let's try to stay on
point. He brings up a valid point and we should respect his opinion,
much like we're respecting yours. Remember,
Why are we discussing here already that works in wicket 1.4 if you
really need it?
public class HelloWorld extends WebPage implements IComponentResolver {
public HelloWorld()
{
add(new WebMarkupContainer(body));
add(new Label(label,my label));
This does not really nest the components logically, does it?
If you set get(body).setVisible(false) will the label remain visible?
**
Martin
2010/11/9 Johan Compagner jcompag...@gmail.com:
Why are we discussing here already that works in wicket 1.4 if you
really need it?
public class
Thank you both for your responses- I totally forgot about it being dynamic.
However, I have tried both code snippets above but still no luck.
I printed the current page within the load() method which prints 0 only on
first load. No message is printed when the page numbers from
I think you need to implement the AjaxPagingNavigator#onAjaxEvent method and
add the currentPage component on target.
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 4:20 PM, vp143 vishal.po...@cipriati.co.uk wrote:
Thank you both for your responses- I totally forgot about it being dynamic.
However, I have tried
no ofcourse not
The label will then be gone because the body is gone.
so the output will be this
html
/html
when the body container is not visible
if the label is not visible:
html
body
/body
/html
this solution you just can throw everything in the panel or webpage
that is the
How will it work if I call get(body).setEnabled(false); and if label
was a textfield? Would the textfield be still enabled?
**
Martin
2010/11/9 Johan Compagner jcompag...@gmail.com:
no ofcourse not
The label will then be gone because the body is gone.
so the output will be this
html
/html
textfield.isEnabledInHierachy() will then ofcourse not get to the
parent it is on.
because its parent is the webpage not the body markupcontainer.
So no this will not resolver from the child to the parent, only the
parent to the child.
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 19:30, Martin Makundi
the queue() method is there in addition to add(), so you dont have to
use it. yes, it is riskier to use under some circumstances because it
is more forgiving then add() - but thats the point i think.
-igor
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 9:41 AM, James Carman ja...@carmanconsulting.com wrote:
On Tue,
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 9:38 AM, Martin Makundi
martin.maku...@koodaripalvelut.com wrote:
The user can queue stuff to the wrong component unknowingly because
they won't get an exception.
You will get an exception if you queue explicitly to the wrong
component. If you don't care about the
Ok, I think one the main point in Igor's proposal was to overcome this
particular problem in addition to few others:
https://github.com/ivaynberg/wicket/tree/component-queuing
**
Martin
2010/11/9 Johan Compagner jcompag...@gmail.com:
textfield.isEnabledInHierachy() will then ofcourse not get to
ok a sample that it also works in with the right parent:
public class HelloWorld extends WebPage implements IComponentResolver {
final Label label;
public HelloWorld()
{
label = new Label(label, new ModelString()
{
it still wont work for a lot of usecases that require proper
hierarchy. like a form trying to find form submitting component, etc
-igor
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 10:59 AM, Johan Compagner jcompag...@gmail.com wrote:
ok a sample that it also works in with the right parent:
public class HelloWorld
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 12:20 AM, Martin Makundi
martin.maku...@koodaripalvelut.com wrote:
I frankly don't see any way to have this auto-hierarchy stuff
without getting lots of unnecessary ambiguity and sources of bugs. I
totally agree with what Eelco wrote below, and what someone else said
and that is only because i cant do
component.setAuto(false)
right after i call autoAdd()
else it would just stay there :)
and this is then only done to resolve it once with the first render...
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 20:03, Igor Vaynberg igor.vaynb...@gmail.com wrote:
it still wont work for
I hate to jump into this, but I wanted to pose an assumption and a solution
assuming my assumption is correct ;)
My assumption is that the key issue with the page objects self assembling
into the correct hierarchy based on the HTML is that multiple objects may
use the same wicket ID. If that's
Hi,
an easy example is:
tr wicket:id=repeatertdspan wicket:id=first/ span
wicket:id=last//td/tr
now the designer wants tds to have a css class based on some
condition. you now have to add a webmarkupcontainer to represent the
td and renest first and last labels into it. the container is
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 12:03 PM, Sven Meier s...@meiers.net wrote:
Hi,
an easy example is:
tr wicket:id=repeatertdspan wicket:id=first/ span
wicket:id=last//td/tr
now the designer wants tds to have a css class based on some
condition. you now have to add a webmarkupcontainer to represent
i wonder if queuing can actually replace icomponentresolver and
auto-adding. i wonder if after onbeforerender we can do what unqueing
does now, parse the markup, find any missing components, and insert
them. autocomponents and autoadd() is something ive always disliked
because it doesnt work for
wtf is with all the stupid and, more importantly, broken analogies? if
you wouldve kept quiet instead of spouting all this garbage i bet a
lot more people wouldve been receptive to the idea. you are digging
your own hole. id like to think we are all practical people, so stick
to practical points.
use AjaxFormChoiceComponentUpdatingBehavior, that one works with Check.
also you can use CheckBox with the ajax behavior instead of CheckGroup/Check
or replace links used by navigator with submit links, there are
factory methods on the navigator.
-igor
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 8:41 AM, Matt
+1 on rethinking the auto* stuff together with the proposed queueing.
Sven
Am 09.11.2010 um 21:17 schrieb Igor Vaynberg:
i wonder if queuing can actually replace icomponentresolver and
auto-adding. i wonder if after onbeforerender we can do what unqueing
does now, parse the markup, find any
Could we introduce the concept of an AutoComponentSource or something,
perhaps? A page/component could potentially have multiple?
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 3:43 PM, Sven Meier s...@meiers.net wrote:
+1 on rethinking the auto* stuff together with the proposed queueing.
Sven
Am 09.11.2010 um
can we fork this into another thread?
-igor
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 12:46 PM, James Carman
ja...@carmanconsulting.com wrote:
Could we introduce the concept of an AutoComponentSource or something,
perhaps? A page/component could potentially have multiple?
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 3:43 PM, Sven
on dev list? You wanna start it?
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 3:57 PM, Igor Vaynberg igor.vaynb...@gmail.com wrote:
can we fork this into another thread?
-igor
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 12:46 PM, James Carman
ja...@carmanconsulting.com wrote:
Could we introduce the concept of an
Yes that works for the first page - only on that page are the javascript
behaviors rendered.
Basically, we are looking for a way to NOT do an ajax request every time we
check a box - The model object of the check group should be updated when we
a) click the submit button or
b) change the page of
see my last suggestion and replace navigator's links with submitlinks
-igor
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 1:02 PM, Matt Schmidt mschmid...@gmail.com wrote:
Yes that works for the first page - only on that page are the javascript
behaviors rendered.
Basically, we are looking for a way to NOT do an
nah. you go ahead. the AutoComponentSource sounds vary vague, you will
need to elaborate it.
-igor
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 12:58 PM, James Carman
ja...@carmanconsulting.com wrote:
on dev list? You wanna start it?
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 3:57 PM, Igor Vaynberg igor.vaynb...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello, I'll try to make this simple.
User fills in some data, clicks submit to persist it but since he has
to login first, he is redirected to a login page (via throw new
RestartResponseAtInterceptPageException(Login.class); ).
He logs in and is redirected back to the original page (via
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 4:07 PM, Henrique quiqu...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello, I'll try to make this simple.
User fills in some data, clicks submit to persist it but since he has
to login first, he is redirected to a login page (via throw new
RestartResponseAtInterceptPageException(Login.class); ).
Are you suggesting to override
AjaxPagingNavigator.newPagingNavigationIncrementLink() and
AjaxPagingNavigator.newPagingNavigationLink() and implement our own
navigation links similar to AjaxPagingNavigationIncrementLink and
AjaxPagingNavigationLink that do the same thing except extends
SubmitLink
Hello, I have a simple form with some RequiredTextFields.
When the user leaves some of them blank, the corresponding messages
show up in the feedback panel telling them they are required.
The issue I am having is that once this happens, the onSubmit() method
is no longer called and wicket starts
Hello all,
I'm new to Wicket. Just wonder about subj (theoretical interest). On one
hand, stateful component model has no architectural limitations on its
own preventing me from reattaching component to different parent, just
like I can do with desktop applications or with any self-contained tree
This isn't a big limitation, all you have to do is store the state in an object
separate from the component hierarchy. Then have the components access that
shared state. Keep MVC principles in mind: The model is your state, the
component is the controller.
On Nov 9, 2010, at 10:41 PM,
Did you take a look at jWicket
(http://wicket-stuff.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/wicket-stuff/trunk/wicketstuff-core/jdk-1.5-parent/jwicket-parent/jwicket-ui/jwicket-ui-dragdrop)?
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: armandoxxx [mailto:armando@dropchop.com]
Gesendet: Dienstag, 9. November
Hey ...
No I haven't.
Regards
Armando
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-wicket.1842946.n4.nabble.com/Wicket-JQuery-drag-and-drop-behaviors-tp3033676p3035602.html
Sent from the Users forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Just a thought for all you posters that provided wicket + jquery project
links. These links should also be available on wicket pages .. I googled for
wicket + jquery implementations before I started to implement my own tiny
little DnD behaviors, but found only wicket + other JS libs pages, so
101 - 147 of 147 matches
Mail list logo
