click-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Bob Schellink <sab...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Comparison with Apache Wicket
Date Mon, 16 Sep 2013 12:41:57 GMT
Like I said, Click is a stateless framework with stateful capabilities.
Sounds like your requirements is to be stateful with some stateless
capabilities?

Sounds like Wicket is a better bet for your application.

Kind regards

Bob

On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 1:40 PM, Daniel Ford
<daniel.clarke.ford@gmail.com>wrote:

> @Bob - Thanks for the links!
> I'm not sold on this approach. It is way too manual for my taste.
>
> @Dennis - I see what you meant with "less HTML to write".
> Looking at
> http://click.avoka.com/click-examples/source-viewer.htm?filename=WEB-INF/classes/org/apache/click/examples/page/table/SearchTablePage.javaone
can see code like:
>
> editLink.setImageSrc("/assets/images/table-edit.png");
>         editLink.setTitle("Edit customer details");
>         editLink.setParameter("referrer", "/table/search-table.htm");
>
>
> so you write your HTML in the Java file ... Not sold again.
>
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 3:12 PM, Bob Schellink <sabob1@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> There isn't much doco except for the javadoc:
>>
>> http://click.apache.org/docs/click-api/org/apache/click/Stateful.html
>>
>>
>> Here is an example:
>> http://click.avoka.com/click-examples/table/search-table.htm
>>
>> It is very basic and light-weight. A control can store and restore it's
>> state in the session. You could look at Table and ClickUtils on how it's
>> done.
>>
>> regards
>>
>> Bob
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 1:46 PM, Daniel Ford <
>> daniel.clarke.ford@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Bob,
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 5:35 PM, Bob Schellink <sabob1@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>  Hi Daniel,
>>>>
>>>> Couple of years ago I've answered this question on StackOverflow:
>>>> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2168249/apache-wicket-vs-apache-click
>>>>
>>>> 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<http://wicket.apache.org/>?
>>>>  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
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

Mime
View raw message