Unifying Insert and InsertText

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
8 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Unifying Insert and InsertText

Vjeran Marcinko
Hi.

What do people think about unifying Insert and InsertText ? Actually, I mean
adding InsertText functionality to Insert? I hope they are not so
incompatibile for that ...Simplier and less confusion for newcomers when
taking first glance on Component Repository ?

-Vjeran



--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.8 - Release Date: 10.5.2005


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: Unifying Insert and InsertText

Patrick Casey

        How were you planning on addressing the auto-chunking
characteristics of InsertText? Were you thinking of just adding a flag to
insert to enable/disable the chunking behavior?

        In general though, sounds like a good idea to me at least. For your
next trick, you could unify textfield and validfield :).

        --- Pat

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Vjeran Marcinko [mailto:[hidden email]]
> Sent: Friday, May 13, 2005 9:30 PM
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: Unifying Insert and InsertText
>
> Hi.
>
> What do people think about unifying Insert and InsertText ? Actually, I
> mean
> adding InsertText functionality to Insert? I hope they are not so
> incompatibile for that ...Simplier and less confusion for newcomers when
> taking first glance on Component Repository ?
>
> -Vjeran




---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Unifying Insert and InsertText

Glen Stampoultzis
In reply to this post by Vjeran Marcinko
+1 too many components that do almost the same thing just causes confusion

Vjeran Marcinko wrote:

>Hi.
>
>What do people think about unifying Insert and InsertText ? Actually, I mean
>adding InsertText functionality to Insert? I hope they are not so
>incompatibile for that ...Simplier and less confusion for newcomers when
>taking first glance on Component Repository ?
>
>-Vjeran
>
>
>
>  
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Unifying Insert and InsertText

Erik Hatcher
Hear hear!  Less is more, less is more, less is more..... COME ON  
CHANT HOWARD'S MANTRA!!!!

What say folks to pulling the ax out on Tapestry and trimming things  
back simplicity.  Howard, and I'm mentioning him by name in a very  
reverent manner despite the likely interpretation that I'm poking  
some fun at him.... I love the mantra but I haven't personally been  
able to identify with it in my Tapestry work - things always ended up  
slightly annoyingly more complex than what you'd envision it should  
be like.  I'm the first to say I'm a switcher - from the "MVC" world  
to the component world.  Let's chip away the rough edges that we've  
all encountered and show the world that Tapestry is the bee's knees  
of modern web application development.  I have reservations from  
being that overtly enthusiastic because of the rough edges that I get  
cut by myself.

In otherwords, and in the sake of the less is more mantra, forget all  
of the above... +1

     Erik



On May 14, 2005, at 3:27 AM, Glen Stampoultzis wrote:

> +1 too many components that do almost the same thing just causes  
> confusion
>
> Vjeran Marcinko wrote:
>
>
>> Hi.
>>
>> What do people think about unifying Insert and InsertText ?  
>> Actually, I mean
>> adding InsertText functionality to Insert? I hope they are not so
>> incompatibile for that ...Simplier and less confusion for  
>> newcomers when
>> taking first glance on Component Repository ?
>>
>> -Vjeran
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Persistent HashMap

Kuon
Hello,

I'm new to tapestry and I try to use an HashMap as a persistent  
property.

I use   <property-specification name="userInfos" persistent="yes"  
type="java.util.HashMap" initial-value="new java.util.HashMap()"/>

But userInfos is cleared everytimes the page is reloaded.

I don't understand what is wrong, because I use exactly the same  
piece of code with String and it works well (type is String and no  
initial-value)

I use tapestry 3.0.3

Regards

Kuon

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Unifying Insert and InsertText

Vjeran Marcinko
In reply to this post by Patrick Casey
----- Original Message -----
From: "Patrick Casey" <[hidden email]>
To: "'Tapestry users'" <[hidden email]>
Sent: Saturday, May 14, 2005 6:45 AM
Subject: RE: Unifying Insert and InsertText


> How were you planning on addressing the auto-chunking
> characteristics of InsertText? Were you thinking of just adding a flag to
> insert to enable/disable the chunking behavior?

Yes, I thought something like adding InsertText's "mode" parameter into
Insert, having some InsertMode.NOBREAK value as default.

-Vjeran



--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.8 - Release Date: 10.5.2005


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Unifying Insert and InsertText

Vjeran Marcinko
In reply to this post by Erik Hatcher
----- Original Message -----
From: "Erik Hatcher" <[hidden email]>
To: "Tapestry users" <[hidden email]>
Sent: Saturday, May 14, 2005 10:11 AM
Subject: Re: Unifying Insert and InsertText


> Hear hear!  Less is more, less is more, less is more..... COME ON
> CHANT HOWARD'S MANTRA!!!!

Noooo people, don't listen to Erik! He chants for simplicity here, but
behind your back, on dev list, he was first to support default parameter
values, and now some other ways to use Insert component in HTML by using
inconsistent ${ognl} :-))))
So, hear hear, chant Vjeran's mantra: LESS (WAYS TO DO SOMETHING) IS
MORE!!!!

Sorry Hatcher, I couldn't hold myself of this joke. ;)

> What say folks to pulling the ax out on Tapestry and trimming things
> back simplicity.  Howard, and I'm mentioning him by name in a very
> reverent manner despite the likely interpretation that I'm poking
> some fun at him.... I love the mantra but I haven't personally been
> able to identify with it in my Tapestry work - things always ended up
> slightly annoyingly more complex than what you'd envision it should
> be like.  I'm the first to say I'm a switcher - from the "MVC" world
> to the component world.  Let's chip away the rough edges that we've
> all encountered and show the world that Tapestry is the bee's knees
> of modern web application development.

I am also excited by what Tapestry can become. As Kurtis Williams once said
nicely, it could become what Spring and Hibernate already achieved in java
world.
Anyway, this enthusiasm is quite common in Tapestry community. Matt Raible
once said that he was bit annoyed by some amount of fanaticism that he
encountered here.

Cheers,
Vjeran



--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.8 - Release Date: 10.5.2005


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Persistent HashMap

Nick Westgate (Work)
In reply to this post by Kuon
Hi Kuon.

Don't use initial-value.
Instead, initialize your properties in pageBeginRender. I do this:

public abstract class MyPage implements PageRenderListener
{
     // called before page rendering and also on form submit (rewind)
     public void pageBeginRender(PageEvent event)
     {
         // initialize properties etc
         if (!event.getRequestCycle().isRewinding())
         {
             if (getUserInfos() == null)
             {
                 setUserInfos(new java.util.HashMap());
             }

See the Wiki:
http://wiki.apache.org/jakarta-tapestry/MoreFrequentlyAskedQuestions
"How do I use the pageRenderListener to setup my page before it is used?"

Cheers,
Nick.


?? ?? wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I'm new to tapestry and I try to use an HashMap as a persistent  property.
>
> I use   <property-specification name="userInfos" persistent="yes"  
> type="java.util.HashMap" initial-value="new java.util.HashMap()"/>
>
> But userInfos is cleared everytimes the page is reloaded.
>
> I don't understand what is wrong, because I use exactly the same  piece
> of code with String and it works well (type is String and no  
> initial-value)
>
> I use tapestry 3.0.3
>
> Regards
>
> Kuon
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]