this is the same as add(new label("foo", new loadabledetachablemodel()
{ load() { return "markup" }}).setescapemdoelstrings(false))

-igor

On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 2:00 PM, Martin Makundi
<martin.maku...@koodaripalvelut.com> wrote:
> Now that I am working with the markupresourcestream directly, I am
> beginning to think that Wicket should support dually both component
> hierarchy and markup hierarchy.
>
> Wicket chould have two kinds of add methods:
>
> add(Component c)
>
> add(String anchorId, MarkupResourceStreamProvider c)
>
> Such a MarkupResourceStreamProvider object could basically look same
> as a component (having setvisible,setenabled,addbehavior,etc.), but
> when it is added, its output would be injected to the parent's markup
> stream at anchor position (instead of a component being added to a
> component tree).
>
> The benefit would be, for a "stateless" component, its markup result
> could be automagically cached and the "component" itself that defined
> the markup, would not remain to waste any resources.
>
> Even better, the output of such a MarkupResourceStreamProvider should
> be logically a chain of "strings" alternating with possible IModels
> such that dynamic model values could be updated every time parent is
> re-rendered.
>
>
> Any comments?
>
>
>
> ..my2wildThughts..
>
> **
> Martin
>
> 2012/2/25 Martin Makundi <martin.maku...@koodaripalvelut.com>:
>> Also
>>
>>   public IResourceStream getMarkupResourceStream(MarkupContainer
>> container, Class<?> containerClass) {
>>
>> seems quite feasible for making conditional markup.
>>
>> However, I must override
>> MarkupContainer.getAssociatedMarkupStream(enforceReload=true) and
>> IMarkupCacheKeyProvider.getCacheKey(==null) to get a different markup
>> for each component.
>>
>>
>>
>> **
>> Martin
>>
>>
>> 2012/2/25 Martin Makundi <martin.maku...@koodaripalvelut.com>:
>>> @Per about 
>>> http://www.small-improvements.com/blog/technical/tuning-wicket-session-size
>>>
>>> You say "If condition A is met, show label A. If not, use
>>> setVisible(false) to hide it. Combine that with Enclosures... Trouble
>>> is, while the hidden component doesn't show up in the markup, it's
>>> still part of the component tree! "
>>>
>>> I remember sometimes when using enclosures, I have rendered a page
>>> which has not added some components inside an enclosure. Maybe there
>>> could be a way to mark a region in the markup (like enclosure) where a
>>> component can be optionally added.
>>>
>>> This way "setVisible=false" could be achieved simply by not adding
>>> that component.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> **
>>> Martin
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org

Reply via email to