just out of curiosity, why such a requirement instead of binding directly to a pojo?
-igor On Jan 30, 2008 9:33 AM, Constantin Y <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi all, > > First of all I want to congratulate Wicket guys for their work. > Until today I have developed applications based mainly on SWT/RCP and > JSP/Servlets. > Currently we are evaluating various frameworks in order to initiate a new > project, which will expose many of our in-house developed system (SWT/RCP) > functions through web. > It seems that Wicket is very close to what we are looking for, because more > or less we have the same logic in our gui applications. > I am trying to create a common template for edit forms responsible to edit > properties of a single pojo. In general, I want to have fool control over > the synchronization between the form's data and pojo's fields. > I am posting some simple code. > I would appreciate if anyone has the time to take a look and tell me if I am > following a right approach about the models and the binding technique. > > Is it too memory expensive to keep instances of pojos inside the form? > Does the session keeps information for all pages or just for the current > page? > > Thanks in advance > > http://www.nabble.com/file/p15186893/FormInput.html FormInput.html > http://www.nabble.com/file/p15186893/FormInput.java FormInput.java > http://www.nabble.com/file/p15186893/FormData.java FormData.java > http://www.nabble.com/file/p15186893/Person.java Person.java > > -- > View this message in context: > http://www.nabble.com/Simple-edit-form-and-models-tp15186893p15186893.html > Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
