Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 9 years ago
I ran into this problem when reavealing places through the old mechanism of
firing a PlaceRequestEvent. You should now use placeManager.revealPlace()
This is documented in:
http://code.google.com/p/gwt-platform/wiki/PortingV1#Do_not_reveal_presenters_th
rough_their_proxy_or_by_firing_a_Plac
I'm guessing this will be an issue for many people porting from V0.2, V0.3. As
such, I will rename PlaceRequestEvent to PlaceRequestEventInternal and will
make sure the javascript documentation is adequate. I will close this issue
then.
Original comment by philippe.beaudoin
on 15 Jun 2010 at 5:21
Original comment by philippe.beaudoin
on 15 Jun 2010 at 5:21
Hi Philippe,
i ran into this problem.
What I still don't understand:
Where, in the example above, the PlaceRequestEvent event is called or where the
old mechanism is used which causes the error?
placeManager.revealPlace(new PlaceRequest(NameTokens.packageLoadPage));
In my case, the content updated exactly as I want it, but the URL still
displays the defaultPlace token and the error message above occurs in the log.
Maybe you can explain this mechanism in more detail?
Original comment by FloOn...@gmail.com
on 18 Jun 2010 at 3:28
With the new mechanism, the PlaceManager maintains a place hierarchy: a list of
all the places found in the history token. This makes it possible to refer to
the place's parent, for example.
The PlaceRequestEvent, on the other hand, is used by the PlaceManager to
communicate with the Proxy that needs to answer the request. It is an internal
event. If you fire it directly, you bypass the PlaceManager and its state gets
out-of-sync.
The reason it was fine before was because the PlaceManager was mostly stateless
(Well, not totally, but the problems were minor. It only meant you skipped
navigation confirmation). Now, however, it causes problems because it means the
place hierarchy will not be updated.
As of now, the PlaceRequestEvent has been renamed to PlaceRequestInternalEvent
and it was made package-protected. You should get an error if you try to fire
it.
Original comment by philippe.beaudoin
on 20 Jun 2010 at 10:44
Original comment by philippe.beaudoin
on 21 Jun 2010 at 6:33
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
jero.car...@gmail.com
on 9 Jun 2010 at 2:03