if xstream doesn't have downsides and is more efficient and we don't care about vm requirements, we could use xstream for undo cloning operations. then if we provided XStreamPageState, you wouldn't have to make anything serializable. (uh... i think). xml seems like a terribly verbose format though. i'm concerned about memory impact...
Gili wrote:
On Tue, 08 Mar 2005 08:32:18 -0800, Jonathan Locke wrote:
if gili wants to go test our new PageState mechanism by making a nice subclass of PageState using xstream (XStreamPageState?), that might make a really nice contrib or extensions class...
Before I do I want to make sure I have a better understanding of how far I can go to serialize as little as possible with the web container and handling the rest with XStream. My main concern is for user-classes: users should not have to worry about serialization or no-arg constructors and I simply want to give them the option of doing so. So it would be nice if say we'd still have to persist Wicket using the web container but everything else could be handled "in-house" by Wicket using XStream.
Gili
------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click _______________________________________________ Wicket-develop mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-develop
------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click _______________________________________________ Wicket-develop mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-develop
