the tabs would be borders, right?
why not just make them static as i suggested earlier?
if there are problems with this, they shouldn't be hard to fix or work around...
Eelco Hillenius wrote:
I have been thinking about storing components in the session as well. I wouldn't know how to do this neatly though.
An advantage of storing components in the session would be that it makes working with reusable panels much easier without having stale page issues so much.
Take a page with tabs. You either should have all tab panels in mem (on the page) and set only the current tab panel visible - which is fine if you know beforehand what tabs you have, and only have a few - or you have to replace the current panel with another one when you switch tabs. The latter usually works best, as that way you can develop a tab/ menu like component without having to know what actual tabs will be used. The disadvantage of this, as that you cannot support the backbutton. If components could be stored in the session as well (and e.g. have their own id's), this problem could be solved.
Eelco
btw, I didn't find the time so far to work on the cacheable images thing. I planned it for this weekend, but have been working for my paid job all weekend instead.
Jonathan Locke wrote:
as far as page versus component scope, you should just put your static component instance in a different place in each case. make sense?
Kamil Rembalski wrote:
Hi,
I remember that some time ago there was a discusion on caching the images for roundCornerPanel. the images should be generated only once per page. Did you think about introducing something like component scope? I think that this would solve the issue to some extend and would be a generally nice feature. Apart from components stored in session, there could be page-scope components (created once per page class) and application components, created once for the whole application. This could improve the memory efficiency (do not create an instance of component for each user if can use the same component). It could also improve performance of applications written in wicket - while writing my sample application I have noticed that about 60% of components display the same data for all users and could therefore be stored sowhere in the 'application scope'. What do you think about this? I am completely not sure if it is a good Idea, and it's pretty high-level...
regards, Kamil
------------------------------------------------------- The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek. It's fun and FREE -- well, almost....http://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt _______________________________________________ Wicket-develop mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-develop
------------------------------------------------------- The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek. It's fun and FREE -- well, almost....http://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt _______________________________________________ Wicket-develop mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-develop
------------------------------------------------------- The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek. It's fun and FREE -- well, almost....http://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt _______________________________________________ Wicket-develop mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-develop
------------------------------------------------------- The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek. It's fun and FREE -- well, almost....http://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt _______________________________________________ Wicket-develop mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-develop
