Dan Syrstad-2 wrote:
>
> Your page code is almost exactly the same as mine. However, your HTML does
> not look correct - it has no tag with a wicket:id in it. So maybe your
> component never rendered.
>
No, your mail client has stripped the code. Let me show you the code again:
Your page code is almost exactly the same as mine. However, your HTML does
not look correct - it has no tag with a wicket:id in it. So maybe your
component never rendered.
I still get an exception using Wicket 1.3.0-beta3.
You say "After startPage() returns, the page has been detached". Evidently
Dan Syrstad-2 wrote:
>
> Actually, Page.detach() is not callable from a JUnit test that uses
> WicketTester in 1.3.0beta3. It throws an exception:
>
I used your code and the test passed. Here is my test page:
test
public class Test extends WebPage {
public Test() {
Actually, Page.detach() is not callable from a JUnit test that uses
WicketTester in 1.3.0beta3. It throws an exception:
org.apache.wicket.WicketRuntimeException: No RequestCycle is currently set!
at org.apache.wicket.Component.getRequest(Component.java:1443)
at org.apache.wicket.Page.onDetach(Page
Dan Syrstad-2 wrote:
>
> Nope. I tried detach() too and that doesn't work - the test still fails. I
> had to write my own method which was basically was a copy of the old
> Page.detachModels() code.
>
> The thing is that In beta3, Page now just acts like a Component as far as
> detachModels()
On 10/1/07, Kent Tong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> Dan Syrstad-2 wrote:
> >
> > This has broken a JUnit test that was testing a detachable model using
> > WicketTester. The same test passes in Wicket 1.2.6. Is there something
> > different I should be doing in 1.3?
> >
>
> If it was calling d
Dan Syrstad-2 wrote:
>
> This has broken a JUnit test that was testing a detachable model using
> WicketTester. The same test passes in Wicket 1.2.6. Is there something
> different I should be doing in 1.3?
>
If it was calling detach() instead of detachModels(), then it should
continue
to pass
guess so
-igor
On 10/1/07, Dan Syrstad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> So the contract of the method has changed since 1.2.6?
> -Dan
>
> On 10/1/07, Igor Vaynberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > i think the way it works now is that there is a visitor that goes
> through
> > the hierarchy and c
So the contract of the method has changed since 1.2.6?
-Dan
On 10/1/07, Igor Vaynberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> i think the way it works now is that there is a visitor that goes through
> the hierarchy and calls detach() on every component. so there is no need
> for
> detachmodels to do much
i think the way it works now is that there is a visitor that goes through
the hierarchy and calls detach() on every component. so there is no need for
detachmodels to do much more then detach the models for the current
component only.
-igor
On 10/1/07, Dan Syrstad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
Anyone know why Page.detachModels() no longer detaches the models of all
child components in 1.3beta3? There is a bunch of code commented out in
Page.detachModels() that previously did this. Now it just calls
super.detachModels() (on Component) which apparently just detaches the model
immediately a
11 matches
Mail list logo
