You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@wicket.apache.org by Jan Vermeulen <ja...@isencia.com> on 2007/03/01 14:40:05 UTC
Re: [Vote] Inheritable model cannot be a wrap model
I really need the small correction, but only in wicket 2.0 (we're already
committed to the new JDK5 features).
As to usability of the combination of wrapOnAssigment & wrapOnInheritance:
* wrapOnAssignment is a great feature, that allows us among other things, to
implement a proxy pattern on models that reduces the detached proxy to just
an id with which to retrieve the original model.
* wrapOnInheritance applied on this proxy allows for the models for any
formComponent to define a custom getObject/setObject behavior without
explicitly having to assign them. And they are equally lightweight on
detach, because they inherit the proxy feature.
Thanks for the support,
Jan.
igor.vaynberg wrote:
>
> we dont really use anything there but generics, which are a help but not
> required. but backporting all these model changes will be a lot of work,
> not
> to mention it will break all the clients, and so martijn will rip you a
> new
> one :)
>
> -igor
>
>
> On 2/28/07, Johan Compagner <jc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> no igor just needs to fix everything :)
>>
>> talking about those model changes.. i guess that really falls under the
>> java
>> 5 part of wicket 2.0 so back porting this
>> to a 1.X release is not what we want yes?
>>
>> johan
>>
>>
>> On 2/28/07, Eelco Hillenius <ee...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > Let's start the blamin'! :)
>> >
>> > On 2/28/07, Johan Compagner <jc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > hmm, i can remember one or 2 things about this, but not specifically
>> > > this case, need to look at the commits
>> > >
>> > > On 2/28/07, Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > > On 2/28/07, Eelco Hillenius <ee...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > I always get the blame! :) Seriously, I don't remember such a
>> thing
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > that just means you complain about issues you dont really care
>> about
>> > :)
>> > > >
>> > > > /me ducks
>> > > >
>> > > > -igor
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>>
>
>
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Inheritable-model-cannot-be-a-wrap-model-tf3308687.html#a9249673
Sent from the Wicket - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: [Vote] Inheritable model cannot be a wrap model
Posted by Jan Vermeulen <ja...@isencia.com>.
I already created one, but forgot to mention it:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-336
Jan.
Eelco Hillenius wrote:
>
> Can you please add a JIRA issue here
> http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET
>
> Eelco
>
> On 3/1/07, Jan Vermeulen <ja...@isencia.com> wrote:
>>
>> I really need the small correction, but only in wicket 2.0 (we're already
>> committed to the new JDK5 features).
>>
>> As to usability of the combination of wrapOnAssigment &
>> wrapOnInheritance:
>> * wrapOnAssignment is a great feature, that allows us among other things,
>> to
>> implement a proxy pattern on models that reduces the detached proxy to
>> just
>> an id with which to retrieve the original model.
>> * wrapOnInheritance applied on this proxy allows for the models for any
>> formComponent to define a custom getObject/setObject behavior without
>> explicitly having to assign them. And they are equally lightweight on
>> detach, because they inherit the proxy feature.
>>
>> Thanks for the support,
>> Jan.
>>
>>
>> igor.vaynberg wrote:
>> >
>> > we dont really use anything there but generics, which are a help but
>> not
>> > required. but backporting all these model changes will be a lot of
>> work,
>> > not
>> > to mention it will break all the clients, and so martijn will rip you a
>> > new
>> > one :)
>> >
>> > -igor
>> >
>> >
>> > On 2/28/07, Johan Compagner <jc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> no igor just needs to fix everything :)
>> >>
>> >> talking about those model changes.. i guess that really falls under
>> the
>> >> java
>> >> 5 part of wicket 2.0 so back porting this
>> >> to a 1.X release is not what we want yes?
>> >>
>> >> johan
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On 2/28/07, Eelco Hillenius <ee...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > Let's start the blamin'! :)
>> >> >
>> >> > On 2/28/07, Johan Compagner <jc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> > > hmm, i can remember one or 2 things about this, but not
>> specifically
>> >> > > this case, need to look at the commits
>> >> > >
>> >> > > On 2/28/07, Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> > > > On 2/28/07, Eelco Hillenius <ee...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > > > I always get the blame! :) Seriously, I don't remember such a
>> >> thing
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > that just means you complain about issues you dont really care
>> >> about
>> >> > :)
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > /me ducks
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > -igor
>> >> > > >
>> >> > >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>> --
>> View this message in context:
>> http://www.nabble.com/Inheritable-model-cannot-be-a-wrap-model-tf3308687.html#a9249673
>> Sent from the Wicket - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>>
>
>
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Inheritable-model-cannot-be-a-wrap-model-tf3308687.html#a9267948
Sent from the Wicket - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: [Vote] Inheritable model cannot be a wrap model
Posted by Eelco Hillenius <ee...@gmail.com>.
Can you please add a JIRA issue here http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET
Eelco
On 3/1/07, Jan Vermeulen <ja...@isencia.com> wrote:
>
> I really need the small correction, but only in wicket 2.0 (we're already
> committed to the new JDK5 features).
>
> As to usability of the combination of wrapOnAssigment & wrapOnInheritance:
> * wrapOnAssignment is a great feature, that allows us among other things, to
> implement a proxy pattern on models that reduces the detached proxy to just
> an id with which to retrieve the original model.
> * wrapOnInheritance applied on this proxy allows for the models for any
> formComponent to define a custom getObject/setObject behavior without
> explicitly having to assign them. And they are equally lightweight on
> detach, because they inherit the proxy feature.
>
> Thanks for the support,
> Jan.
>
>
> igor.vaynberg wrote:
> >
> > we dont really use anything there but generics, which are a help but not
> > required. but backporting all these model changes will be a lot of work,
> > not
> > to mention it will break all the clients, and so martijn will rip you a
> > new
> > one :)
> >
> > -igor
> >
> >
> > On 2/28/07, Johan Compagner <jc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> no igor just needs to fix everything :)
> >>
> >> talking about those model changes.. i guess that really falls under the
> >> java
> >> 5 part of wicket 2.0 so back porting this
> >> to a 1.X release is not what we want yes?
> >>
> >> johan
> >>
> >>
> >> On 2/28/07, Eelco Hillenius <ee...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Let's start the blamin'! :)
> >> >
> >> > On 2/28/07, Johan Compagner <jc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > > hmm, i can remember one or 2 things about this, but not specifically
> >> > > this case, need to look at the commits
> >> > >
> >> > > On 2/28/07, Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > > > On 2/28/07, Eelco Hillenius <ee...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > I always get the blame! :) Seriously, I don't remember such a
> >> thing
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > that just means you complain about issues you dont really care
> >> about
> >> > :)
> >> > > >
> >> > > > /me ducks
> >> > > >
> >> > > > -igor
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Inheritable-model-cannot-be-a-wrap-model-tf3308687.html#a9249673
> Sent from the Wicket - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>