I see,
sorry, I have confused your example with another one. Just increasing
one number really should't leak that much...
-Matej
Ari Suutari wrote:
Hi,
That depends.. If it's the example you sent here, the problem might be
that the listview always grows. and at the end, you replace like
ahh.there should be a unit test for that... do you have a quick one that i can add?the pagemap should be appended somehow by the indexed coding strategy.But why is it throwing it for every one? Are you sitting in a pagemap?
johanOn 4/18/06, Michael Day [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Looks like this is
No problem, I think that remaining leaks is just how IE works
Ari S.
- Original Message -
From: Matej Knopp [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net
Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2006 10:08 AM
Subject: Re: [Wicket-user] wicket ajax memory leak with IE
I see,
Take a look at WicketTester which we use for junit testing. It is not
exactly what you asking for as it implements a in-container mock
servlet container, but the outcome is the same
Juergen
On 4/18/06, Henry Story [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I need to generate html for use by swing
Hi all,
I'm using maven2 to build my wicket web-app and I was just wondering
if there are any intentions to upload the newer wicket 1.2 releases to
ibiblio as part of the official wicket release process or if there is
some other repository available where one could get the newest wicket
Isn't there an ExternalLink class?
Hello list,
for a Wicket-application requiring a signed-in user I use
PasswordTextField.getModelObject() for acquiring the entered data.
Going the easy way, I simply stored this in the database, as it was
already encrypted, and comparison during login is also very easy to
do.
Now I upgraded from
I use Wicket 1.2-rc1.
I use FormComponentFeedbackBorder, but when input error is occured, * is
not output.
How has meens been changed?
Hi,
I am trying Wicket for a few days now and wanted to use
FormComponentFeedbackBorder, too. I encountered the same problem with
1.2beta3 and 1.2RC1. To
on 1.1.1 : do the redirect and then setResponsePage(null)johanOn 4/18/06, Andrew Strickland
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:I assume the ReleaseTarget class is a
1.2 class.In our environment we're still at 1.1.1
you mean PasswordTextField.getModelValue()?getModelObject() should return the thing you feed it. (that is by default not encrypted but just a string)But yes there is some changes in the base64 encodig that is done on top of the crypting.
I think we are still discussing what should be the end
I created
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detailaid=1472451group_id=119783atid=684975
Thanks for spotting it.
Eelco
On 4/18/06, Sebastian Scheid [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I use Wicket 1.2-rc1.
I use FormComponentFeedbackBorder, but when input error is occured, * is
not
Yes that is true. We most likely change it back. The reason it has
been changed is because / and + are not allowed in URLs and we use the
same encryption algorithm for URL encryption Though we used a
(old) standards compliant base64 encoder/decoder it is not URL
compliant. The new standard
markup:meta wicket:id=meta name=description content=I want to dynamically change this text/code:WebMarkupContainer meta=new WebMarkupContainer(meta);
add(meta);meta.add(new SimpleAttributeModifier(content, mydynamiccontent);-IgorOn 4/18/06, nato
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:I have a meta tag in my
fixed, thanks.-IgorOn 4/14/06, Arto Arffman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ha! found a bug
there is one parameter missing when generating ajax-response...
Signature in wicket-ajax.js is: function wicketSubmitFormById(formId, url, submitButton, successHandler, failureHandler) {
I don't know whether it is such a good idea to 'unfix' a bug just for
compatibility. It was fixed because people were experiencing problems
with it, right? So unfixing it will give those users those problems
again.
Eelco
On 4/18/06, Juergen Donnerstag [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes that is true.
Or, if you write components without knowing about the pages that they
are on, you can use header contributions (see
wicket.behavior.HeaderContributor).
Eelco
On 4/18/06, Igor Vaynberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
markup:
meta wicket:id=meta name=description content=I want to dynamically
change
I think Johan is right. We originally added base64 de/encoding to
AbstractCrypt because crypted URLs didn't work properly (due to chars
not allowed in URLs). Unfortunately RFC2054 base64 encoding as
implemented by apache and used by wicket until now is not suitable as
well as it it uses / and +
The bug is introduced by the fix for the url encoding. Not the other way round. This one should be rolled back, and the URL encoding should be fixed in a different manner.Also, the Wicket 1.1 encryption used the Sun BASE64Encoding, which is also RFC2045 compliant. Our base64 implementation should
Wicket maintainers will upload the final 1.2 release. I uploaded one of
the betas myself, but it's hardly worth the trouble. You can easily mvn
install from the project root of a Wicket snapshot (since Wicket uses
Maven 2), or even from the svn trunk.
Nathan
Roland Kaercher wrote:
Hi all,
I am trying to format the DatePicker component using DatePickerSettings but the format is not being applied to the Date and instead the format String "MM/dd/" is getting displayed when I select a Date. Below is the code:private static final String DATE_FORMAT_STRING =
That is not true. We introduced base64 because the encrypted strings
weren't URL compliant. And than we detected that sun/apache/rfc2054
base64 encoding doesn't do the job either. But you agree with removing
it completely out of Crypt and not doing any base64 in AbstractCrypt.
Juergen
On
Thanks,I'll add itMartijnOn 4/18/06, Zenrique Steckelberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Brazilian Portuguese: pt_BRRequiredValidator=campo '${label}' \u00E9 obrigat\u00F3rio.
TypeValidator='${input}' n\u00E3o \u00E9 um ${type} v\u00E1lido.NumberValidator.range=${input} deve ser entre ${minimum} e
Thanks for answering. I improved the javadocs.
Eelco
On 4/18/06, Marco Geier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
use *JavaScript* format semantics instead of java's.
e.g.
private static final String DATE_FORMAT_STRING = %m/%d/%Y;
Aditya Patel wrote:
I am trying to format the DatePicker component
I propose the following:introduce wicket.util.crypt.Base64Rfc3548, implementing the current Base64 as in rc1make wicket.util.crypt.Base64 class Rfc2045 compliant as it was before rc1create a new method on AbstractCrypt that does the url-safe encoding using Base64Rfc3548
document that it is not
I don't care either, as long as we don't re-introduce something that
is broken just to be backwards compatible. So whatever problem this
fixed in the first place, that should stay fixed. If we can do that in
a backwards compatible way without clutering the API, that's all the
better.
Eelco
On
thanks a lot, I hadn't realized this, just tried it and works like a charm :-)
roland
On 4/18/06, Nathan Hamblen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Wicket maintainers will upload the final 1.2 release. I uploaded one of
the betas myself, but it's hardly worth the trouble. You can easily mvn
install
Rüdiger,In the next RC this problem will be fixed, and you'll get the = back in the string.If you need it earlier, you can check out wicket trunk and build your own wicket version.
MartijnOn 4/18/06,
Rüdiger Schulz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello list,for a Wicket-application requiring a signed-in
Dear Wicket Gurus,
what should happen, if I klick on a tab of an AjaxTabbedPanel? The
generated HTML code looks like this:
form
action=/Visiomedic/VisioPAD?wicket:interface=:1:seiteninhalt:tabs:panel
:inputForm::IFormSubmitListener method=post
id=seiteninhalt_tabs_panel_inputForminput
May I suggest that you inlude ![CDATA[ ... ]] inside the script element.For example,script type=text/_javascript_//![CDATA[function isXhtmlFriendly() { alert('Yes, I am XHTML friendly');
alert('quotes , less than , and ampersand used in this _javascript_ code do not yield to XHTML validation
Also, will this give trouble for pages that are not explicitly XHTML complient?
Eelco
On 4/18/06, Eelco Hillenius [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Without the // I think?
So instead of
//![CDATA[
function isXhtmlFriendly() {
alert('Yes, I am XHTML friendly');
alert('quotes , less than ,
They basically push for people to use application/xhtml+xml, which I
believe all browsers support -- except Internet Explorer ;) So we're
back to using text/html.
They seem to imply that when you migrate your code from text/html to
application/xhtml+xml stuff will break because
I think the current best practice is to send application/xhtml+xml
to browsers that support it and text/html to browsers that don't
(like Internet Explorer). Does it really matter in practice? I
don't know.
Michael Day
On Apr 18, 2006, at 7:43 PM, cowwoc wrote:
* PGP Signed by an
On 4/18/06, cowwoc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I personally think this is much ado about nothing. I've used
text/html for a long time and the CDATA thing below and to date I
haven't run into any problems. And if I do in the future, I'll just fix
it ;)
Gili
Unfortunately, we have to find
Like I said, I've never had any problems with text/html with the CDATA
blocks I mentioned.
Gili
Eelco Hillenius wrote:
On 4/18/06, cowwoc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I personally think this is much ado about nothing. I've used
text/html for a long time and the CDATA thing below and to
agreed. i think in this instance we should just go with text/html. it might not be the current best practice, but it works for everything out there.-IgorOn 4/18/06,
Eelco Hillenius [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 4/18/06, cowwoc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:I personally think this is much ado about
mime type: text/htmldoctype: xhtml 1.0 transitionalscript and style tags: enclose it within CDATAWith this setup that I've been doing for almost a year, I haven't had any problems. My applications run even on the very sucking IE. But Wicket prevents me from having a valid XHTML because of the
The code was working fine on my development machine. However, when I
moved it to production (a much faster box), the buttons I'm generating
all showed up as broken links. Just shooting from the hip, I'm guessing
something isn't flushing its buffer.
Here's the HTML:
img wicket:id=listImg /
does the log contain a better exception message/stack trace? you are not giving us much to go on.a common problem on prod servers and image buttons is that vm is started w/out awt support.try starting the vm like this: java -
Djava.awt.headless=true ...-IgorOn 4/18/06, kurt heston [EMAIL
I fill in the gap.
I write follow code in Form class and html.
Form
final FormComponentFeedbackBorder feedback = new
FormComponentFeedbackBorder(feedback);
add(feedback);
final RequiredTextField loginId = new RequiredTextField(loginId);
feedback.add(loginId);
html
I don't think Wicket requires input /. At least not by purpose.
Wicket should work with input ../input as well.
Juergen
On 4/19/06, nato [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Actually, I'm a bit confious what document type to use for my Wicket html
markups... It's not HTML and not XHTML either. It's not
Without the // I think?
So instead of
//![CDATA[
function isXhtmlFriendly() {
alert('Yes, I am XHTML friendly');
alert('quotes , less than , and ampersand used in this javascript
code do not yield to XHTML validation error');
}
//]]
it's
![CDATA[
function isXhtmlFriendly() {
That's just it. I've got logging set to debug and am getting nothing
but debug entries in the log. Wicket thinks it's really rendering the
image for me.
The VM arg doesn't make a diiference.
Igor Vaynberg wrote:
does the log contain a better exception message/stack trace? you are
not
Hi Igor.
I'm sorry I've not checked it.
Thank you.
Regars,
R.A
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/%22*%22-is-not-output-t1465629.html#a3981657
Sent from the Wicket - User forum at Nabble.com.
---
This SF.Net email is
Today (Tuesday), Wicket moved up to #98 on sourceforge's project list, entering the top 100 projects for the first time. That makes us a very popular project, especially given how gigantic sourceforge is these days! Just thought you all might want to know this.
Best, Jon
Hi,
From: Igor Vaynberg [EMAIL PROTECTED]
well, at some point the server calls will start returning right? and so
xmlhttprequest objects will start being reused. it will consume memory to a
certain point and then stop. if you ask me 100ms for an ajax update is
unreasonable anyways,
Well,
45 matches
Mail list logo
