You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@wicket.apache.org by Johan Compagner <jc...@gmail.com> on 2007/06/04 21:04:11 UTC
Re: [jira] Commented: (WICKET-605) Stataless form skips page parameters
i am getting a bit tired of all those threadlocals that have to be
cleaned... I already discussed this with matej and i thing we should
give the RequestCycle metadata... then we can store any thing we want
and it is auto cleanup
On 6/4/07, Eelco Hillenius (JIRA) <ji...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> [
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-605?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12501258
> ]
>
> Eelco Hillenius commented on WICKET-605:
> ----------------------------------------
>
> The best hack I can currently imagine is to set the current PageParameters
> instance as a threadlocal somewhere (RequestCycle?) when the
> WebPage(PageParameters) constructor is called (btw, I see no reason why this
> constructor couldn't be moved to Page... we can do that regardless), and
> clean it up again in RequestCycle#detach.
>
> It would be yet another threadlocal unfortunately, but otoh it is valuable
> information to have accesible, which is hard to get to right now.
>
> WDYT?
>
> > Stataless form skips page parameters
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > Key: WICKET-605
> > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-605
> > Project: Wicket
> > Issue Type: Bug
> > Components: wicket
> > Affects Versions: trunk
> > Environment: linux, glassfish v2
> > Reporter: József Börcsök
> > Assignee: Eelco Hillenius
> >
> > Page parameters are not included in stataless form action parameter.
> > I think stateless form should override urlFor(RequestListenerInterface
> listener) method and append page parameters. (Submit works if I manually add
> them at runtime ie. with firebug plugin in browser.)
>
> --
> This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
> -
> You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
>
>
Re: [jira] Commented: (WICKET-605) Stataless form skips page parameters
Posted by Johan Compagner <jc...@gmail.com>.
don't we pretty much already have that map?
RequestCycle.get().getRequest().getRequestParameters().getParameters()
that one is parsed in the first step. (but mutable)
but that one is going into the PAgeParameters
except that PP has a little bit more that is not done in the first step but
in the second one of the request cycle because bookmarkable mounts can
introduce any kind of parameters from the url.
and this is done in more then one place So the only thing i see to really do
it
right is to make sure that our base page has a PageParameters constructor
and users should call that super() so that we can set the real one in the
request cycle
johan
On 6/4/07, Eelco Hillenius <ee...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Sorry, but I don't agree. I think it's YAGNI. Metadata is a bit uglier
> to read (at least the code to access it), it's harder to trace in the
> debugger and just less obvious. I actually don't think it would be
> that out of place to put the (immutable instance of) request
> parameters as parsed in the first step of request cycle processing in
> the request.
>
> Eelco
>
> On 6/4/07, Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 6/4/07, Eelco Hillenius <ee...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > i am getting a bit tired of all those threadlocals that have to be
> > > > cleaned... I already discussed this with matej and i thing we should
> > > > give the RequestCycle metadata... then we can store any thing we
> want
> > > > and it is auto cleanup
> > >
> > > Agreed. RequestCycle currently doesn't have metadata though. What's
> > > the advantage of using meta data there instead of a normal property? I
> > > think none...
> >
> > I think the advantage of metadata is to have less tight coupling of
> > other parts to the request cycle. We are going to use the request
> > cycle as a Bag of stuff, which is needed during RC processing, but
> > don't have a direct relationship to the RC, other than that it is part
> > of the RC.
> >
> > Having a metadata facility in the RC will facilitate this, and not
> > make the RC 'bloated'.
> >
> > Just thinking out loud.
> >
> > Martijn
> >
> > --
> > Join the wicket community at irc.freenode.net: ##wicket
> > Wicket 1.2.6 contains a very important fix. Download Wicket now!
> > http://wicketframework.org
> >
>
Re: [jira] Commented: (WICKET-605) Stataless form skips page parameters
Posted by Eelco Hillenius <ee...@gmail.com>.
Sorry, but I don't agree. I think it's YAGNI. Metadata is a bit uglier
to read (at least the code to access it), it's harder to trace in the
debugger and just less obvious. I actually don't think it would be
that out of place to put the (immutable instance of) request
parameters as parsed in the first step of request cycle processing in
the request.
Eelco
On 6/4/07, Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 6/4/07, Eelco Hillenius <ee...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > i am getting a bit tired of all those threadlocals that have to be
> > > cleaned... I already discussed this with matej and i thing we should
> > > give the RequestCycle metadata... then we can store any thing we want
> > > and it is auto cleanup
> >
> > Agreed. RequestCycle currently doesn't have metadata though. What's
> > the advantage of using meta data there instead of a normal property? I
> > think none...
>
> I think the advantage of metadata is to have less tight coupling of
> other parts to the request cycle. We are going to use the request
> cycle as a Bag of stuff, which is needed during RC processing, but
> don't have a direct relationship to the RC, other than that it is part
> of the RC.
>
> Having a metadata facility in the RC will facilitate this, and not
> make the RC 'bloated'.
>
> Just thinking out loud.
>
> Martijn
>
> --
> Join the wicket community at irc.freenode.net: ##wicket
> Wicket 1.2.6 contains a very important fix. Download Wicket now!
> http://wicketframework.org
>
Re: [jira] Commented: (WICKET-605) Stataless form skips page parameters
Posted by Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com>.
On 6/4/07, Eelco Hillenius <ee...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > i am getting a bit tired of all those threadlocals that have to be
> > cleaned... I already discussed this with matej and i thing we should
> > give the RequestCycle metadata... then we can store any thing we want
> > and it is auto cleanup
>
> Agreed. RequestCycle currently doesn't have metadata though. What's
> the advantage of using meta data there instead of a normal property? I
> think none...
I think the advantage of metadata is to have less tight coupling of
other parts to the request cycle. We are going to use the request
cycle as a Bag of stuff, which is needed during RC processing, but
don't have a direct relationship to the RC, other than that it is part
of the RC.
Having a metadata facility in the RC will facilitate this, and not
make the RC 'bloated'.
Just thinking out loud.
Martijn
--
Join the wicket community at irc.freenode.net: ##wicket
Wicket 1.2.6 contains a very important fix. Download Wicket now!
http://wicketframework.org
Re: [jira] Commented: (WICKET-605) Stataless form skips page parameters
Posted by Eelco Hillenius <ee...@gmail.com>.
Ok, let's go for it then. Who's taking it up?
Eelco
On 6/5/07, Matej Knopp <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm definitely +1 for metadata. The thread locals are clumsy and
> extremely dangerous.
>
> -Matej
>
> On 6/5/07, Johan Compagner <jc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > But i also need it for other stuff that are specific to specific
> > > > implementations of certain things
> > > > for example the AccessStackStore doesn't need such a thread locale but
> > > SLC
> > > > does..
> > >
> > > Fair enough. So you would use such a 'bag' in request cycle to store
> > > stuff like dirtyObjects (session)? Aren't you afraid this will open up
> > > a new can of worms (users misusing this facility rather then providing
> > > their own request cycle implementation for instance)?
> >
> >
> >
> > Isn't that the problem we also should then have on Session or Component?
> > And i don't see it miss used a lot (at least all the examples i get from
> > people here on the lists/web)
> > also don't think that will happen a lot because most people (you and me
> > included!) like
> > to have a simple get/setter. But the problem is that we as the framework
> > just can't do that
> > for specific/default implementations of stuff. Then Requestcycle would
> > become polluted.
> >
> > The nice thing about metadata is (compare to a pure put/get like hashmap)
> > then they can be generified
> > so with java5 you don't have to cast
> >
>
Re: [jira] Commented: (WICKET-605) Stataless form skips page parameters
Posted by Matej Knopp <ma...@gmail.com>.
I'm definitely +1 for metadata. The thread locals are clumsy and
extremely dangerous.
-Matej
On 6/5/07, Johan Compagner <jc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > But i also need it for other stuff that are specific to specific
> > > implementations of certain things
> > > for example the AccessStackStore doesn't need such a thread locale but
> > SLC
> > > does..
> >
> > Fair enough. So you would use such a 'bag' in request cycle to store
> > stuff like dirtyObjects (session)? Aren't you afraid this will open up
> > a new can of worms (users misusing this facility rather then providing
> > their own request cycle implementation for instance)?
>
>
>
> Isn't that the problem we also should then have on Session or Component?
> And i don't see it miss used a lot (at least all the examples i get from
> people here on the lists/web)
> also don't think that will happen a lot because most people (you and me
> included!) like
> to have a simple get/setter. But the problem is that we as the framework
> just can't do that
> for specific/default implementations of stuff. Then Requestcycle would
> become polluted.
>
> The nice thing about metadata is (compare to a pure put/get like hashmap)
> then they can be generified
> so with java5 you don't have to cast
>
Re: [jira] Commented: (WICKET-605) Stataless form skips page parameters
Posted by Johan Compagner <jc...@gmail.com>.
>
> > But i also need it for other stuff that are specific to specific
> > implementations of certain things
> > for example the AccessStackStore doesn't need such a thread locale but
> SLC
> > does..
>
> Fair enough. So you would use such a 'bag' in request cycle to store
> stuff like dirtyObjects (session)? Aren't you afraid this will open up
> a new can of worms (users misusing this facility rather then providing
> their own request cycle implementation for instance)?
Isn't that the problem we also should then have on Session or Component?
And i don't see it miss used a lot (at least all the examples i get from
people here on the lists/web)
also don't think that will happen a lot because most people (you and me
included!) like
to have a simple get/setter. But the problem is that we as the framework
just can't do that
for specific/default implementations of stuff. Then Requestcycle would
become polluted.
The nice thing about metadata is (compare to a pure put/get like hashmap)
then they can be generified
so with java5 you don't have to cast
Re: [jira] Commented: (WICKET-605) Stataless form skips page parameters
Posted by Eelco Hillenius <ee...@gmail.com>.
> But i also need it for other stuff that are specific to specific
> implementations of certain things
> for example the AccessStackStore doesn't need such a thread locale but SLC
> does..
Fair enough. So you would use such a 'bag' in request cycle to store
stuff like dirtyObjects (session)? Aren't you afraid this will open up
a new can of worms (users misusing this facility rather then providing
their own request cycle implementation for instance)?
Eelco
Re: [jira] Commented: (WICKET-605) Stataless form skips page parameters
Posted by Johan Compagner <jc...@gmail.com>.
the second level cache has now a thread local
Session has 2 thread locals
especially the first one of the SLC do you really want to have a property on
the RequestCycle for that?
then you get really strange coupling.
i am not talking about the PageParameters. That could maybe go into the
request cycle
because that is pretty much core (is it web only or not??)
But i also need it for other stuff that are specific to specific
implementations of certain things
for example the AccessStackStore doesn't need such a thread locale but SLC
does..
johan
On 6/4/07, Eelco Hillenius <ee...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > i am getting a bit tired of all those threadlocals that have to be
> > cleaned... I already discussed this with matej and i thing we should
> > give the RequestCycle metadata... then we can store any thing we want
> > and it is auto cleanup
>
> Agreed. RequestCycle currently doesn't have metadata though. What's
> the advantage of using meta data there instead of a normal property? I
> think none...
>
> Eelco
>
Re: [jira] Commented: (WICKET-605) Stataless form skips page parameters
Posted by Eelco Hillenius <ee...@gmail.com>.
> i am getting a bit tired of all those threadlocals that have to be
> cleaned... I already discussed this with matej and i thing we should
> give the RequestCycle metadata... then we can store any thing we want
> and it is auto cleanup
Agreed. RequestCycle currently doesn't have metadata though. What's
the advantage of using meta data there instead of a normal property? I
think none...
Eelco