incubator-isis-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dan Haywood <>
Subject Re: Wicket and Isis and passing domain objects...
Date Mon, 18 Apr 2011 22:36:43 GMT
Hi Kevin,

On 18/04/2011 19:36, Kevin Meyer - KMZ wrote:
> Hi Dan, I guess this one is for you...
> I'm playing around with creating a custom view using Wicket, to take
> advantage of the Wicket Palette form component.
Nice.  Great that you're trying this out.

> I have a simple class (Tag) which basically just extends
> AbstractDomainObject and has a single String member (called
> Description).
> In the palette contructor, I have to pass in a IModel choicesModel.
> If I use the java.util.List that is returned by allInstances, I get a "Unable
> to serialize class" exception, complaining:
> [class=dom.todo.Tag$$EnhancerByCGLIB$$b459b0e9]<----- field that
> is not serializable
OK, so here's the scoop.  I've provided a bunch of implementations of 
IModel, all of which implement Wicket's LoadableDetachableModel and so 
should "do the right thing".

The most common model to use is EntityModel, which wraps an 
ObjectAdapter (which in turn wraps up a single domain object entity).

In your case, though, you should use EntityCollectionModel, which can be 
used to wrap either a standalone collection (eg returned from an action) 
or a parented action (eg Order/OrderDetail).

Hopefully if you have a look at some of the existing panels and how they 
use these models, you'll get the idea.

> The palette is still rendered, though. I have not yet put in any handlers
> to try and receive the choices list and adjust the eventual target
> collection.
> I wanted to ask: What do you recommend I use to hold, store, and
> retrieve the collection of domain objects that are to be manipulated
> using the wicket Palette component?
the models (eg EntityModel) in 
org.apache.isis.viewer.wicket.model.models; see above.

> Should I use a collection of a simple wrapper class (that is not
> persisted, etc), that represents the domain object as just an integer ID
> (sequence?) and a title?  I can see advantages to not passing the
> "live" domain object for serialisation by Wicket. For a first pass, I will
> assume that the ID is just the index of the objects in the returned
> collection...
>   ...So far this seems to work (i.e. it does not throw a "not serializable"
> exception.
So, as you see from the above, the wicket viewer is a little more 
sophisticated than this, and (hopefully!) will work with any object or 
list with not too much effort.


> Regards,
> Kevin

  • Unnamed multipart/mixed (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message