Eelco Hillenius wrote:
>> Somewhere I have to start naming these intermediate objects; the end of
>> my statements are starting to look like Lisp code!  :-)
> 
> Of course, you don't *have* to use annonymous classes. Make a reusable
> class, and see how much more readable your code will be :)

I know that of course, but my usual rule is that if I repeat something a 
third time I switch to a reusable class.  I only did this one twice.

>>  [questions about]  urlFor(Class listenerInterface)
> Just looking at the code can do wonders.

Finding the time is the real wonder at the moment.  I thought the 
project was put to bed months ago, and it's suddenly back haunting me.


> method getURL in wicket.markup.html.link.Link is called in
> onComponentTag for getting the url that should be used for rendering
> the link (e.g. when it is coupled to an <a tag, it is put in the href
> attribute). It is deliberately overridable for situations like ours.

That was pretty clear without diving into Wicket internals.  This next, 
though, is only now becoming clear:

> The Component.urlFor(xx) methods call RequestCycle.urlFor(xx) which
> find the proper IRequestCodingStrategy instance and call encode on
> them. What that all does is calculating the proper urls for callbacks
> to components, bookmarkable pages, resources or whatever Wicket
> IRequestTarget  it might be.

Thank you for your time and for all the help you and the rest of this 
list have given me.

Unfortunately, this was just one little nice-to-have enhancement I 
thought I'd throw in while I was making changes.  It works fine until I 
put the code into it's production environment, which means it's being 
called as part of a Plumtree portal.  And there something falls apart 
when I do this.  It's not Wicket's fault, of course, but some strange 
interaction with Plumtree's Javascript.  In Firefox the fragment 
identifier is gone; in IE I get an "Internal Error."  Although the fault 
is clearly with Plumtree that doesn't help me.  I think "nice-to-have" 
is going to turn into "yes-it-would-have-been-nice".  :-)

Thanks again,

   -- Scott



_______________________________________________
Wicket-user mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user

Reply via email to