click-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Daniel Ford <>
Subject Re: Comparison with Apache Wicket
Date Thu, 12 Sep 2013 11:46:14 GMT
Hi Bob,

On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 5:35 PM, Bob Schellink <> wrote:

>  Hi Daniel,
> Couple of years ago I've answered this question on StackOverflow:
> I think it the answer is still relevant today. One change is that stateful
> pages have been deprecated in Click. Instead the notion of stateful
> components was added.
> We've found that stateful pages wasn't a good fit in Click. As can be
> expected the conceptual model between a stateful and stateless page is
> vast, almost like
> coding in two different frameworks which is bad for maintenance. Stateful
> components seems a better fit as one has fine control over what and when to
> store state.

Where I can read more about how stateful components work ?
Since the page is not stored how a following http request finds the
stateful component ? Where the component is stored ? Or maybe just its
state is preserved at the client (cookie, request parameter, ...) ?
I'll be thankful if you send me a link to a document or even to the code
dealing with this logic.

> I believe Click would be easier to learn and get going. With Wicket one
> should be able to create more complicated UI's as all state is preserved.
> Looking at the click-examples
> should give a good idea of the type of applications one would normally
> write with Click. As you can see it very web like, instead of desktop like.
> Hope this helps.
> Kind regards
> Bob
> On 2013/09/10 22:40, Daniel Ford wrote:
>    Hi,
>  I noticed the mail about stopping development on Click.
>  Can someone of you compare Click with Apache Wicket<>?
>  If you have experience with both frameworks I'll be glad to hear what you
> believe Click does better than Wicket and what is better in Wicket.
>  Thank you in advance!
> Daniel

View raw message