CompoundModel based on proxies
|
View:
New views
20 Messages
—
Rating Filter:
Alert me
|
| < Prev | 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 | Next > |
 |
Re: CompoundModel based on proxies
by jwcarman
::
Rate this Message:
|
|
|
Re: CompoundModel based on proxies
by Jonathan Locke
::
Rate this Message:
|
|
|
RE: CompoundModel based on proxies
by Thomas Maeder
::
Rate this Message:
|
|
|
Re: CompoundModel based on proxies
by Sam Barnum
::
Rate this Message:
|
|
|
Re: CompoundModel based on proxies
by Johan Compagner
::
Rate this Message:
|
|
|
Re: CompoundModel based on proxies
by Scott Swank
::
Rate this Message:
|
|
|
Re: CompoundModel based on proxies
by Johan Compagner
::
Rate this Message:
|
|
|
Re: CompoundModel based on proxies
by Matej Knopp
::
Rate this Message:
|
|
|
Re: CompoundModel based on proxies
by Sebastiaan van Erk
::
Rate this Message:
Matej Knopp wrote:
> model.getFirstName() can't really return IModel, if > Customer.getFirstName() returns string. > > Anyway, I like the idea, but I don't like the syntax. instead of one > line [add(new TextField("id", model).setRequred(true)) ] you have now > three separate lines. > > So I was thinking of something more like > > SafePropertyModel<Customer> model = new SafePropertyModel<Customer>(customer); > > add(new TextField("tf", model.bind(model.proxy().getCustomerName() > )).setRequired(true)); > > This way you can have it one one line. > > -Matej And model.bind() takes an Object argument (considering we don't know in advance what type getCustomerName() returns)... What about primitive types? Overload bind() for those as well? And the call to getCustomerName() has the side effect of setting a model object somewhere (e.g., in an instance field of model) which model.bind() can subsequently return? Very interesting. I don't like the proxy() method name though. If you call it something like property() it will look more like you're binding to a property of Customer: model.bind(model.property().getCustomerName()) VERY neat idea though... :-) Regards, Sebastiaan > > On Fri, Feb 8, 2008 at 6:17 PM, Johan Compagner <jcompagner@...> wrote: >> don't worry about creating the models >> That will happen anyway in 1.3 (that needs to be done for example to get the >> right object especially when we generify stuff) >> >> see CompoundPropertyModel.wrapOnInheritance() >> >> joan >> >> >> >> >> >> On Feb 8, 2008 5:41 PM, Scott Swank <scott.swank@...> wrote: >> >> > Interesting. So >> > >> > model.getFirstName() >> > >> > would return a PropetyModel based on the results of proxy.eval()? If >> > I understand you correctly that creates many models (one per >> > component) instead of reusing a single model, but that may well not be >> > the end of the world. Or does getFirstName() return a CompoundModel >> > that is properly bound this this component? Intriguing none the less. >> > I hadn't considered this option, but I'm going to play with it a bit. >> > I rather like that direction. >> > >> > >> > On Feb 8, 2008 8:29 AM, Johan Compagner <jcompagner@...> wrote: >> > > i try to look at this this weekend, but i have a quick question >> > > I find it a bit verbose can't it be a bit shorter like this (just an >> > > example) >> > > >> > > SharedPropertyModel<Customer> model = new >> > > SharedPropertyModel<Customer>(customer); >> > > this.setModel(model); >> > > >> > > FormComponent firstName = new CustomerNameField("firstName", >> > > model.getFirstName()).setRequired(true); >> > > add(firstName); >> > > >> > > where getFirstName() returns the model >> > > >> > > johan >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > On Feb 6, 2008 6:57 PM, Scott Swank <scott.swank@...> wrote: >> > > >> > > > One of our more clever developers created a CompoundPropertyModel that >> > > > uses a cglib proxy to strongly bind the mutators to the model. It >> > > > looks like this: >> > > > >> > > > SharedPropertyModel<Customer> model = new >> > > > SharedPropertyModel<Customer>(customer); >> > > > this.setModel(model); >> > > > >> > > > FormComponent firstName = new >> > > > CustomerNameField("firstName").setRequired(true); >> > > > model.bind(firstName).to().getFirstName(); >> > > > add(firstName); >> > > > >> > > > FormComponent lastName = new >> > > > CustomerNameField("lastName").setRequired(true); >> > > > model.bind(lastName).to().getLastName(); >> > > > add(lastName); >> > > > >> > > > FormComponent addr1 = new >> > > > AddressField("address1").setRequired(true); >> > > > model.bind(addr1).to().getAddress().getAddress1(); >> > > > add(addr1); >> > > > >> > > > FormComponent addr2 = new AddressField("address2"); >> > > > model.bind(addr2).to().getAddress().getAddress2(); >> > > > add(addr2); >> > > > >> > > > FormComponent city = new CityField("city"); >> > > > model.bind(city).to().getAddress().getCity(); >> > > > add(city); >> > > > >> > > > We're happy to share if folk like this approach. N.B. that the .to() >> > > > call is for readability rather than out of any necessity. >> > > > >> > > > Cheers, >> > > > Scott >> > > > >> > > > -- >> > > > Scott Swank >> > > > reformed mathematician >> > > > >> > > >> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@... >> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@... >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Scott Swank >> > reformed mathematician >> > >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@... >> > For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@... >> > >> > >> > > > |
|
|
Re: CompoundModel based on proxies
by Matej Knopp
::
Rate this Message:
|
|
|
Re: CompoundModel based on proxies
by Sebastiaan van Erk
::
Rate this Message:
Matej Knopp wrote:
> Hi, > > On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 11:13 AM, Sebastiaan van Erk > <sebster@...> wrote: >> Matej Knopp wrote: >> > model.getFirstName() can't really return IModel, if >> > Customer.getFirstName() returns string. >> > >> > Anyway, I like the idea, but I don't like the syntax. instead of one >> > line [add(new TextField("id", model).setRequred(true)) ] you have now >> > three separate lines. >> > >> > So I was thinking of something more like >> > >> > SafePropertyModel<Customer> model = new SafePropertyModel<Customer>(customer); >> > >> > add(new TextField("tf", model.bind(model.proxy().getCustomerName() >> > )).setRequired(true)); >> > >> > This way you can have it one one line. >> > >> > -Matej >> >> So proxy() returns a Customer proxy? >> >> And model.bind() takes an Object argument (considering we don't know in >> advance what type getCustomerName() returns)... What about primitive >> types? Overload bind() for those as well? > Well, the return object is not important at all. What is important is > the getCustomerName() call. That marks somewhere in the model that > last accessed property was called "customerName". and then immediately > after this model.bind takes this information. the overloading. If bind takes an object as argument, then overloading will not be necessary due to autoboxing. :-) >> And the call to getCustomerName() has the side effect of setting a model >> object somewhere (e.g., in an instance field of model) which >> model.bind() can subsequently return? > Model bind will return a model (variation of propertymodel probably). > It will take the information that getCustomerName call on proxy > provided. Ok, so the proxy remembers which getter was called last, and you use that to construct the model in bind(). Of course. >> Very interesting. I don't like the proxy() method name though. If you >> call it something like property() it will look more like you're binding >> to a property of Customer: > Well, the naming can certainly be improved. I'm not sure about > "property()" though. Well, we can discuss this more anyway. >> model.bind(model.property().getCustomerName()) Neither am I. :-) For one, it's quite long. But on the other hand, you do bind to a model property, and so it reads ok. I think that proxies should be "invisible" for general users, so they shouldn't have to understand the magic going on here, nor that proxies are involved. >> VERY neat idea though... :-) > Thanks. What I really like about this solution is that it can be implemented completely separately from wicket-core, so you can just put it in it's own project. :-) Regards, Sebastiaan > -Matej >> Regards, >> Sebastiaan >> >> >> >> > >> > On Fri, Feb 8, 2008 at 6:17 PM, Johan Compagner <jcompagner@...> wrote: >> >> don't worry about creating the models >> >> That will happen anyway in 1.3 (that needs to be done for example to get the >> >> right object especially when we generify stuff) >> >> >> >> see CompoundPropertyModel.wrapOnInheritance() >> >> >> >> joan >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Feb 8, 2008 5:41 PM, Scott Swank <scott.swank@...> wrote: >> >> >> >> > Interesting. So >> >> > >> >> > model.getFirstName() >> >> > >> >> > would return a PropetyModel based on the results of proxy.eval()? If >> >> > I understand you correctly that creates many models (one per >> >> > component) instead of reusing a single model, but that may well not be >> >> > the end of the world. Or does getFirstName() return a CompoundModel >> >> > that is properly bound this this component? Intriguing none the less. >> >> > I hadn't considered this option, but I'm going to play with it a bit. >> >> > I rather like that direction. >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > On Feb 8, 2008 8:29 AM, Johan Compagner <jcompagner@...> wrote: >> >> > > i try to look at this this weekend, but i have a quick question >> >> > > I find it a bit verbose can't it be a bit shorter like this (just an >> >> > > example) >> >> > > >> >> > > SharedPropertyModel<Customer> model = new >> >> > > SharedPropertyModel<Customer>(customer); >> >> > > this.setModel(model); >> >> > > >> >> > > FormComponent firstName = new CustomerNameField("firstName", >> >> > > model.getFirstName()).setRequired(true); >> >> > > add(firstName); >> >> > > >> >> > > where getFirstName() returns the model >> >> > > >> >> > > johan >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > On Feb 6, 2008 6:57 PM, Scott Swank <scott.swank@...> wrote: >> >> > > >> >> > > > One of our more clever developers created a CompoundPropertyModel that >> >> > > > uses a cglib proxy to strongly bind the mutators to the model. It >> >> > > > looks like this: >> >> > > > >> >> > > > SharedPropertyModel<Customer> model = new >> >> > > > SharedPropertyModel<Customer>(customer); >> >> > > > this.setModel(model); >> >> > > > >> >> > > > FormComponent firstName = new >> >> > > > CustomerNameField("firstName").setRequired(true); >> >> > > > model.bind(firstName).to().getFirstName(); >> >> > > > add(firstName); >> >> > > > >> >> > > > FormComponent lastName = new >> >> > > > CustomerNameField("lastName").setRequired(true); >> >> > > > model.bind(lastName).to().getLastName(); >> >> > > > add(lastName); >> >> > > > >> >> > > > FormComponent addr1 = new >> >> > > > AddressField("address1").setRequired(true); >> >> > > > model.bind(addr1).to().getAddress().getAddress1(); >> >> > > > add(addr1); >> >> > > > >> >> > > > FormComponent addr2 = new AddressField("address2"); >> >> > > > model.bind(addr2).to().getAddress().getAddress2(); >> >> > > > add(addr2); >> >> > > > >> >> > > > FormComponent city = new CityField("city"); >> >> > > > model.bind(city).to().getAddress().getCity(); >> >> > > > add(city); >> >> > > > >> >> > > > We're happy to share if folk like this approach. N.B. that the .to() >> >> > > > call is for readability rather than out of any necessity. >> >> > > > >> >> > > > Cheers, >> >> > > > Scott >> >> > > > >> >> > > > -- >> >> > > > Scott Swank >> >> > > > reformed mathematician >> >> > > > >> >> > > >> >> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@... >> >> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@... >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > -- >> >> > Scott Swank >> >> > reformed mathematician >> >> > >> >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@... >> >> > For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@... >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> > > > |
|
|
Re: CompoundModel based on proxies
by Matej Knopp
::
Rate this Message:
|
|
|
Re: CompoundModel based on proxies
by Scott Swank
::
Rate this Message:
|
|
|
Re: CompoundModel based on proxies
by atul singh-5
::
Rate this Message:
|
|
|
Re: CompoundModel based on proxies
by Sebastiaan van Erk
::
Rate this Message:
Well, there's a problem with normal PropertyModels (or
CompoundPropertyModels). For example, if you have the following textfield: TextField tf = new TextField("name", new PropertyModel(customer, "customerName")); Then a refactor of the customerName property (and the getCustomerName() method) in an IDE such as Eclipse or NetBeans will *silently* break the above code, which you will discover only at runtime... The proxy based approach solves exactly this problem. Regards, Sebastiaan atul singh wrote: > I feel this approach does NOT solve a problem.....Its just an alternative .. > > On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 4:48 PM, Matej Knopp <matej.knopp@...> wrote: > >> We've reworked the implementation a bit,it works like this: >> >> >> SafePropertyModel<Person> p = new SafePropertyModel<Person>(new Person()); >> TextField field = new TextField("name", p.bind(p.property >> ().getFirstName())); >> >> It's attached to the JIRA issue: >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-1327 >> >> -Matej >> >> >> On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 11:32 AM, Sebastiaan van Erk >> <sebster@...> wrote: >>> Matej Knopp wrote: >>> > Hi, >>> > >>> > On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 11:13 AM, Sebastiaan van Erk >>> > <sebster@...> wrote: >>> >> Matej Knopp wrote: >>> >> > model.getFirstName() can't really return IModel, if >>> >> > Customer.getFirstName() returns string. >>> >> > >>> >> > Anyway, I like the idea, but I don't like the syntax. instead of >> one >>> >> > line [add(new TextField("id", model).setRequred(true)) ] you have >> now >>> >> > three separate lines. >>> >> > >>> >> > So I was thinking of something more like >>> >> > >>> >> > SafePropertyModel<Customer> model = new >> SafePropertyModel<Customer>(customer); >>> >> > >>> >> > add(new TextField("tf", model.bind(model.proxy >> ().getCustomerName() >>> >> > )).setRequired(true)); >>> >> > >>> >> > This way you can have it one one line. >>> >> > >>> >> > -Matej >>> >> >>> >> So proxy() returns a Customer proxy? >>> >> >>> >> And model.bind() takes an Object argument (considering we don't >> know in >>> >> advance what type getCustomerName() returns)... What about >> primitive >>> >> types? Overload bind() for those as well? >>> > Well, the return object is not important at all. What is important is >>> > the getCustomerName() call. That marks somewhere in the model that >>> > last accessed property was called "customerName". and then >> immediately >>> > after this model.bind takes this information. >>> >>> OK, that's what I described. :-) And I was being stupid with respect to >>> the overloading. If bind takes an object as argument, then overloading >>> will not be necessary due to autoboxing. :-) >>> >>> >>> >> And the call to getCustomerName() has the side effect of setting a >> model >>> >> object somewhere (e.g., in an instance field of model) which >>> >> model.bind() can subsequently return? >>> > Model bind will return a model (variation of propertymodel probably). >>> > It will take the information that getCustomerName call on proxy >>> > provided. >>> >>> Ok, so the proxy remembers which getter was called last, and you use >>> that to construct the model in bind(). Of course. >>> >>> >>> >> Very interesting. I don't like the proxy() method name though. If >> you >>> >> call it something like property() it will look more like you're >> binding >>> >> to a property of Customer: >>> > Well, the naming can certainly be improved. I'm not sure about >>> > "property()" though. Well, we can discuss this more anyway. >>> >> model.bind(model.property().getCustomerName()) >>> >>> Neither am I. :-) For one, it's quite long. But on the other hand, you >>> do bind to a model property, and so it reads ok. I think that proxies >>> should be "invisible" for general users, so they shouldn't have to >>> understand the magic going on here, nor that proxies are involved. >>> >>> >>> >> VERY neat idea though... :-) >>> > Thanks. >>> >>> What I really like about this solution is that it can be implemented >>> completely separately from wicket-core, so you can just put it in it's >>> own project. :-) >>> >>> Regards, >>> Sebastiaan >>> >>> >>> >>> > -Matej >>> >> Regards, >>> >> Sebastiaan >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> > >>> >> > On Fri, Feb 8, 2008 at 6:17 PM, Johan Compagner < >> jcompagner@...> wrote: >>> >> >> don't worry about creating the models >>> >> >> That will happen anyway in 1.3 (that needs to be done for >> example to get the >>> >> >> right object especially when we generify stuff) >>> >> >> >>> >> >> see CompoundPropertyModel.wrapOnInheritance() >>> >> >> >>> >> >> joan >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> On Feb 8, 2008 5:41 PM, Scott Swank <scott.swank@...> >> wrote: >>> >> >> >>> >> >> > Interesting. So >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> > model.getFirstName() >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> > would return a PropetyModel based on the results of >> proxy.eval()? If >>> >> >> > I understand you correctly that creates many models (one per >>> >> >> > component) instead of reusing a single model, but that may >> well not be >>> >> >> > the end of the world. Or does getFirstName() return a >> CompoundModel >>> >> >> > that is properly bound this this component? Intriguing none >> the less. >>> >> >> > I hadn't considered this option, but I'm going to play with >> it a bit. >>> >> >> > I rather like that direction. >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> > On Feb 8, 2008 8:29 AM, Johan Compagner <jcompagner@...> >> wrote: >>> >> >> > > i try to look at this this weekend, but i have a quick >> question >>> >> >> > > I find it a bit verbose can't it be a bit shorter like this >> (just an >>> >> >> > > example) >>> >> >> > > >>> >> >> > > SharedPropertyModel<Customer> model = new >>> >> >> > > SharedPropertyModel<Customer>(customer); >>> >> >> > > this.setModel(model); >>> >> >> > > >>> >> >> > > FormComponent firstName = new >> CustomerNameField("firstName", >>> >> >> > > model.getFirstName()).setRequired(true); >>> >> >> > > add(firstName); >>> >> >> > > >>> >> >> > > where getFirstName() returns the model >>> >> >> > > >>> >> >> > > johan >>> >> >> > > >>> >> >> > > >>> >> >> > > >>> >> >> > > >>> >> >> > > >>> >> >> > > On Feb 6, 2008 6:57 PM, Scott Swank <scott.swank@...> >> wrote: >>> >> >> > > >>> >> >> > > > One of our more clever developers created a >> CompoundPropertyModel that >>> >> >> > > > uses a cglib proxy to strongly bind the mutators to the >> model. It >>> >> >> > > > looks like this: >>> >> >> > > > >>> >> >> > > > SharedPropertyModel<Customer> model = new >>> >> >> > > > SharedPropertyModel<Customer>(customer); >>> >> >> > > > this.setModel(model); >>> >> >> > > > >>> >> >> > > > FormComponent firstName = new >>> >> >> > > > CustomerNameField("firstName").setRequired(true); >>> >> >> > > > model.bind(firstName).to().getFirstName(); >>> >> >> > > > add(firstName); >>> >> >> > > > >>> >> >> > > > FormComponent lastName = new >>> >> >> > > > CustomerNameField("lastName").setRequired(true); >>> >> >> > > > model.bind(lastName).to().getLastName(); >>> >> >> > > > add(lastName); >>> >> >> > > > >>> >> >> > > > FormComponent addr1 = new >>> >> >> > > > AddressField("address1").setRequired(true); >>> >> >> > > > model.bind >> (addr1).to().getAddress().getAddress1(); >>> >> >> > > > add(addr1); >>> >> >> > > > >>> >> >> > > > FormComponent addr2 = new >> AddressField("address2"); >>> >> >> > > > model.bind >> (addr2).to().getAddress().getAddress2(); >>> >> >> > > > add(addr2); >>> >> >> > > > >>> >> >> > > > FormComponent city = new >> CityField("city"); >>> >> >> > > > model.bind >> (city).to().getAddress().getCity(); >>> >> >> > > > add(city); >>> >> >> > > > >>> >> >> > > > We're happy to share if folk like this approach. N.B. >> that the .to() >>> >> >> > > > call is for readability rather than out of any necessity. >>> >> >> > > > >>> >> >> > > > Cheers, >>> >> >> > > > Scott >>> >> >> > > > >>> >> >> > > > -- >>> >> >> > > > Scott Swank >>> >> >> > > > reformed mathematician >>> >> >> > > > >>> >> >> > > >>> >> >> > > > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >> >> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: >> users-unsubscribe@... >>> >> >> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: >> users-help@... >>> >> >> > > > >>> >> >> > > > >>> >> >> > > >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> > -- >>> >> >> > Scott Swank >>> >> >> > reformed mathematician >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >> >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@... >>> >> >> > For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@... >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >> >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> >> >> >> -- >> Resizable and reorderable grid components. >> http://www.inmethod.com >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@... >> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@... >> >> > |
|
|
Re: CompoundModel based on proxies
by jwcarman
::
Rate this Message:
|
|
|
Re: CompoundModel based on proxies
by igor.vaynberg
::
Rate this Message:
|
|
|
Re: CompoundModel based on proxies
by jwcarman
::
Rate this Message:
|
|
|
Re: CompoundModel based on proxies
by igor.vaynberg
::
Rate this Message:
|
|
|
Re: CompoundModel based on proxies
by jwcarman
::
Rate this Message:
|
smime.p7s (4K) | < Prev | 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 | Next > |
| Free embeddable forum powered by Nabble | Forum Help |
