On 17/11/11 16:44, Eric Kizaki wrote:
Violates MVC: It smashes view and controller code into the same Java file.
You have code that regulates page flow and code that changes css attributes
in the same file. Even Spring MVC had better separation of concerns.
JSP/Servlets with Spring MVC is better.
Wicket is NOT based on MVC, so there's nothing to violate :). From
Wicket in Action: "Wicket components represent the View and Controller
in this pattern (MVC)"
Excessively verbose and complicated: What is a LoadableDetachableModel?
The learning curve for Wicket is immense.
Breaks POJOS: A real POJO does not need to implement an interface or extend
a class. Wicket forces your beans to be Serializable. This is like using
EJBs in how it forced you to implement interfaces.
if you had understood LoadableDetachableModel (or at least used it) you
would not say "breaks POJO".
Terrible AJAX: Compared to a few lines of jQuery AJAX is excessively
complicated and verbose in Wicket. A lot of things like “AJAX” links should
not be done via “AJAX” at all. Hiding a div on the client would simply be
done with JavaScript on the client. Wicket better not require a server
??! do you know that Wicket is a Java framework and not a JavaScript
(client side) library?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
