#: Martijn Dashorst changed the world a bit at a time by saying on 10/27/2005
7:28 AM :#
+1 on moving OGNL into extensions.
I think the OGNL thing is good, it provides a nice base
implementation. I'd like to see the current implementation still being
available for those 1% that need the full
I'm also +1 on moving OGNL into extension
I guess this is: person.children.[0].name and Johan already mentioned it.
I think Johan mentioned, it'll be person.children.0.name
Juergen
On 10/27/05, Alexandru Popescu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
#: Martijn Dashorst changed the world a bit at a time
Also +1
Actually our project is what triggerd this change and will bring some
new features we need. Nothing fancy though.
What I have gathered from johan it will be possible to get elements from
maps / lists / arrays etc.
The expression would be something like person.children.0.name It is very
Thanks for all responses.
It's very encouraging to get immediate replies - it makes me believe that
wicket is alive and has strong community, which is obviously a good thing.
Igor, your phonebook app is exactly what I've been looking for, thanks !
Tomek Kaczanowski
yes i currently don't have support for { or [ or things like that.
Just plain text with dots. This makes it very easy and fast to parse.
but if people really want this:
person.children[0].name
does ognl has a special map _expression_? something like person.childeren{child1}.name ?
i know that it
Yes, I agree. Keep it simple. Doesn't Groovy do it the same way, you
proposed it, Johan?
Juergen
On 10/27/05, Alexandru Popescu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
#: Johan Compagner changed the world a bit at a time by saying on 10/27/2005
10:06 AM :#
yes i currently don't have support for { or [ or
On Wed, 2005-10-26 at 10:59 -0700, Igor Vaynberg wrote:
This is similar to how i do it. My application is a spring bean that
gets injected by spring on creation and is then used as a service
locator. I am simply questioning the automatic injection into pages,
does it really make sense if it
I strongly support replacing OGNL with something more performant, as
long as it is not yet another new syntax for accessing properties (we
already have OGNL, Spring property access syntax, some expression
languages from the JSP/Taglib world and probably some others). At
least it sould be OGNL
That NPE is already handled.
When you do a get a and somewhere in the line a null is encountered then null is returned
With a set a NPE is thrown currently because if that is not handled you loose data (which is bad)
I still am thinking of a way to create the null object then this can be
#: Maurice Marrink changed the world a bit at a time by saying on 10/27/2005
11:16 AM :#
That nullpointer is our problem too and one of the reasons it is being
changed right now.
Don't think johan has put in the syntax you just suggested though.
Afaik it just returns null.
IMO evaluating
yes it directly returns null.
i my eyes a nullpropertyhanlder only applies to when you want to set something not when you want to get something.On 10/27/05, Alexandru Popescu
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
#: Maurice Marrink changed the world a bit at a time by saying on10/27/2005 11:16 AM :# That
can you make an bug report for this?
I have to look at it more closely can't do this anymore for 1.1On 10/26/05, Nathan Hamblen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:Usually Hibernate works all right for me with copies of Collections, but
maybe it depends on the mapping. It's probably not as fast at
ahh wait a second
If you click on that link the form which you also should have (you have a TextField that should be in a form)
is course not submitted. You just click on the link not a submit button!
On 10/27/05, Johan Compagner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
i find youre code a bit strange and not so
i find youre code a bit strange and not so clean i would do this:
implement getListItemModel of the listView and make a CompoundModel for that listitem
protected
IModel getListItemModel(final IModel listViewModel, final int index)
{
return new
Scott T weaver wrote:
Hmm, I don’t think I can agree with that. SiteMesh, AFAIK, can
aggregate from whole host of markup sources to produce a “finished
product”. I don’t see how that can be accomplished in the example you
presented or with Wicket in general, not with out a lot of work that
Looks to me you are right. We didn't think about a Panel being a child
of a Form. I guess it was our assumption that FormComponents are
always a direct child of a Form.
Nested panels inside the same form was the first thing I checked when
evaluating Wicket. It's a very handy solution to break
Would you please open a bug for it. Thanks.
As long as long as no one else on the list is against fixing it that
way, I'll try and put it into 1.1.
Juergen
On 10/27/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Looks to me you are right. We didn't think about a Panel being a child
of a Form.
as far as i know (eelco know better) portlet support will be introduced in 1.2
There is some ground work already for it in 1.1
johanOn 10/27/05, Dorel Vaida [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Scott T weaver wrote: Hmm, I don't think I can agree with that. SiteMesh, AFAIK, can aggregate from whole host of
I'm also +1 for replacing ognl.
I'm not trying to say that Wicket is slow, not at all, but any speed
improvement is .an improvement :)!
- Johannes
Johan Compagner wrote:
Hi
I have written a replacement of OGNL when i test it with a very simple
test (The FormInput example)
then i see
Johan Compagner wrote:
yes i currently don't have support for { or [ or things like that.
Just plain text with dots. This makes it very easy and fast to parse.
but if people really want this:
person.children[0].name
I can think of two reasons why an access operator [] could be useful:
- It
i think you just have te redirect to a full url (but then with https)
On 10/26/05, Phil Kulak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At first I tried sending a redirect to the URL in the request, butwith https instead of http, but that breaks down if the user isredirected to the secure page since the url may
+1, if it doesn't break stuff.
MartijnOn 10/27/05, Juergen Donnerstag [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Would you please open a bug for it. Thanks.As long as long as no one else on the list is against fixing it thatway, I'll try and put it into 1.1.JuergenOn 10/27/05,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I can think of two reasons why an access operator [] could be useful:- It might make the _expression_ more readable, because you know that you
are operating on an array, List or Map by looking at the _expression_.- The content of the access operator could be an _expression_ itself.
If I can get the ability to have common decorators (or tiles as inStruts) from Wicket markup inheritance, then I will use wicket only. I do not have to use SiteMesh. I assumed that I would need SiteMesh since I wanted the features of decorators/tiles but did not want to use Struts Tiles. I'll try
I use ognl {} projection to make non-List Collections into Lists for a
ListView. (And it /is/ way too slow with long lists.) If list view could
handle a SortedSet, or just any Collection, it would eliminate that need.
It would still be nice to have an OgnlPropertyModel, even if it doesn't
Hi all,
Marco and I just released the first version our new Dojo wiper
component, the first in our DojoFX series. They can be found in
contrib.dojo.DojoFX on CVS (FXOnClickWiper.java)
In addition to these components, we've made two tutorials which can be
found on our weblog
Johan Compagner wrote:
I can think of two reasons why an access operator [] could be useful:
- It might make the expression more readable, because you know that you
are operating on an array, List or Map by looking at the expression.
- The content of the access operator could be an expression
Nathan Hamblen wrote:
I use ognl {} projection to make non-List Collections into Lists for a
ListView. (And it /is/ way too slow with long lists.) If list view could
handle a SortedSet, or just any Collection, it would eliminate that need.
I created my own List Component in a few minutes that
You can set whatever mocks you need in the webapplication class using the
same setters that spring uses. Chances are you are going to need the
webapplication instance present if you are testing wicket anyways as it is a
very central object.
-Igor
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL
I think it would be very practical to both keep such a OGNL property
model /and/ see how we can support both that and our improved property
model in compound property models.
Eelco
On 10/27/05, Nathan Hamblen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I use ognl {} projection to make non-List Collections into
I'm not too sure about using dots for index/ map references. It
differs from OGNL:
http://www.ognl.org/2.6.7/Documentation/html/LanguageGuide/indexing.html.
And personally, I think it is usefull to be able to distinct single
from indexed properties just by looking at the expression. Is it
/that/
1.1 will have the dataview package in extensions, you can use that to
display sets,etc but you lose paging capability since there really is no
easy way to define an offset within a set unless you are willing to do
something like:
Iterator getItems(int first, int count) {
Iterator
ognl can do map lookup with just a _expression_
(that was the first thing i had to do because that did go wrong when i started testing it)
this was used: Ognl.getValue(string, anHashmap);
so the need to do [sd] even with juk why is that needed ...?
On 10/27/05, Eelco Hillenius [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Yea, but my problem is finding that full url because when
checkAccess() is called, the url in the request is not the redirect
handler, but whatever interface was called last, and you can't
redirect to that.
On 10/27/05, Johan Compagner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
i think you just have te redirect
If it equals at least one of the OGNL uses, then I'm fine with it.
Eelco
On 10/27/05, Johan Compagner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
ognl can do map lookup with just a expression
(that was the first thing i had to do because that did go wrong when i
started testing it)
this was used:
The only thing for me to use [] for an index and { } for a map (for example)
would be that this:
mymap.property would mean that you really want to have a getProperty on a map
(same goes for list)
so i will change it to use with [] (without quotes that i find totally not needed)
foo.list[0].bar
I'd prefer if it used a groovy-like syntax (or actual groovy behind the
curtain) as much as possible.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-10-27 11:15:05 AM
The only thing for me to use [] for an index and { } for a map (for
example)
would be that this:
mymap.property would mean that you really want to
I'm trying to get something to work with:
page.urlFor(IRedirectListener.class);
but it just doesn't and I can't seem to figure out why not.
On 10/27/05, Phil Kulak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yea, but my problem is finding that full url because when
checkAccess() is called, the url in the
Johan Compagner wrote:
The only thing for me to use [] for an index and { } for a map (for example)
would be that this:
mymap.property would mean that you really want to have a getProperty on
a map
(same goes for list)
so i will change it to use with [] (without quotes that i find totally
Woo hoo! Got it by basically doing what PageMap.redirectToInterceptPage does.
If I made a patch that added a setSecure(boolean) method to WebPage
and handled all this stuff (redirects to https or http accordingly),
would you guys review and consider putting it in the core?
On 10/27/05, Phil
We're comitted to 1.4, so that's fine.
Eelco
On 10/27/05, Phil Kulak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Oh of course, that's what I meant. What Java version do I have to
write for? I believe that Pattern was introduced in 1.4. Is that too
late a version?
On 10/27/05, Eelco Hillenius [EMAIL
and that is?
Very similar to what you are proposing:
http://groovy.codehaus.org/Collections
and
bean?.property (allows bean to be null)
(see http://groovy.codehaus.org/Migration+From+Classic+to+JSR+syntax )
I really appreciate how OGNL is very flexible with allowing me to do
things
Why not keep wicket simple? I really like the simplicity of the dot notation
johan created. I think we should use [] only as a hint. By default wicket
tries to find a getter and then checks if the object is a list/set/map and
contains the key. The [] hint would tell wicket to skip the getter and
It's all about choice of course. I agree with most proponents of
getting rid of OGNL: it's way too heavy for 95% (or more) of the usual
cases, and less dependencies == good. But, I think it would be really
good not only to keep alternatives in e.g. the extensions project, or
with a seperate
Oh, and of course AbstractPropertyModel.ognlExpression should be
replaced by e.g. .expression or something similar.
Eelco
---
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the JBoss Inc.
Get Certified Today * Register for a JBoss Training Course
Free
some Wicket stuff. Wanna vote? Read it at:
http://jroller.com/page/JonathanLocke/20051027
Eelco
---
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the JBoss Inc.
Get Certified Today * Register for a JBoss Training Course
Free Certification Exam for All
Jonathan filed a bug report with SUN that he thinks, when solved, will
improve some Wicket stuff. Wanna vote? Read it at:
http://jroller.com/page/JonathanLocke/20051027
Eelco
---
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the JBoss Inc.
Get Certified
Igor Vaynberg wrote:
I am simply questioning the automatic injection into pages, does it really
make sense if it only takes you half way there. If in my panel i need
to do a
((MyPage)getPage()).getService()
then i might as well do
((MyApp)getApplication).getService().
IMHO this makes a great
On Oct 27, 2005, at 12:26 PM, Alexandru Popescu wrote:
#: Joni Suominen changed the world a bit at a time by saying on
10/27/2005 11:00 AM :#
On Wed, 2005-10-26 at 10:59 -0700, Igor Vaynberg wrote:
This is similar to how i do it. My application is a spring bean that
gets injected by
On Oct 27, 2005, at 11:00 AM, Joni Suominen wrote:
On Wed, 2005-10-26 at 10:59 -0700, Igor Vaynberg wrote:
This is similar to how i do it. My application is a spring bean that
gets injected by spring on creation and is then used as a service
locator. I am simply questioning the automatic
On Oct 27, 2005, at 9:21 PM, Sven Meier wrote:
BTW rather than letting panels pull service from the page, I'd
prefer the page to push services into its panels (i.e. the page
injects dependencies into its panels).
I don't want my panels to be dependent on the containing page.
Yup. That
Hello all,
This is my very first post on this list. Glad to being able to
exchange ideas with you.
On 10/27/05, Igor Vaynberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why not keep wicket simple? I really like the simplicity of the dot notation
johan created. I think we should use [] only as a hint.
By
Hello,
On 10/27/05, Eelco Hillenius [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
AbstractPropertyModel could work with something like a
propertyresolver/ delegate (one more indirection :)) for getting and
setting values based on a expression, and it might even be a good idea
to have the option of having the
Yeah, that's true. You're right. Maybe it isn't such a good idea then.
Eelco
On 10/27/05, Laurent PETIT [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
On 10/27/05, Eelco Hillenius [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
AbstractPropertyModel could work with something like a
propertyresolver/ delegate (one more
Is AOP realy needed for that?
Propably I do not understand the problem but why can't you just write a
special Panel, Page etc which calls an overrideable injectDependencies()
method in the constructor. The default implementation of
injectDependencies() does basicly read the annotations,
You would also need to call injectDependencies when a page and components
are deserialized from session - the latter can be tricky.
-Igor
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Christian Essl
Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2005 3:55 PM
To:
#: Christian Essl changed the world a bit at a time by saying on 10/28/2005
12:54 AM :#
Is AOP realy needed for that?
Propably I do not understand the problem but why can't you just write a
special Panel, Page etc which calls an overrideable injectDependencies()
method in the constructor.
Furthermore, you should never ever call a overridable method in a constructor.
Eelco
On 10/27/05, Alexandru Popescu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
#: Christian Essl changed the world a bit at a time by saying on 10/28/2005
12:54 AM :#
Is AOP realy needed for that?
Propably I do not
On Thu, 27 Oct 2005 15:56:03 -0700, Igor Vaynberg [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
You would also need to call injectDependencies when a page and components
are deserialized from session - the latter can be tricky.
You are right. Maybe construct on deserialization proxies which on first
call
On Thu, 27 Oct 2005 16:15:37 -0700, Eelco Hillenius
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Furthermore, you should never ever call a overridable method in a
constructor.
You are right. It must be commented to not be dependent on any state set
of the constructors below this magic helper class. Apart of
60 matches
Mail list logo
