Thanks, Martin! So it definitely worth giving it a try: I'll do that ASAP.

Regards,

Pierre


On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 8:13 AM, Martin Grigorov <[email protected]>wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I think you should use the Atmosphere APIs.
>
> Wicket.Ajax.get() knows nothing about WebSocket technology so it won't
> work.
>
> Wicket NativeWebSocket exposes Wicket.WebSocket.** APIs but afaik there is
> no such thing in WIcket-Atmosphere.
>
>
> On Sat, Jul 6, 2013 at 6:43 PM, Pierre Goupil <[email protected]
> >wrote:
>
> > Good afternoon,
> >
> > When using Wicket-Atmosphere (0.11), which is the recommended way to
> send a
> > message to the server in order to receive a WebSocket (or fallback
> > transport) response?
> >
> > I mean, I am supposed to do:
> >
> > var socket = $.atmosphere;var request = new
> > $.atmosphere.AtmosphereRequest();var subSocket =
> > socket.subscribe(request);
> > subSocket.push(JSON.stringify({ 'blah' }));
> >
> > Or:
> >
> > Wicket.Ajax.get()
> >
> > ?
> >
> > I doubt that there is a sensible performance difference, but I prefer to
> > ask.
> >
> > Sorry if this is a silly question.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Pierre
> >
>

Reply via email to