myfaces-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Rhys Parry" <rpa...@Infoterra.com>
Subject RE: Help me understand component lifecycle please.
Date Thu, 27 Apr 2006 18:53:29 GMT
I am an ass. 

I would love to.  I cannot share the version I developed for the company without asking the
big guy, however, if he says no I will write my own and share.  Give me a few days ( weekend
) and I will post something before monday.



Rhys

-----Original Message-----
From: mwessendorf@gmail.com [mailto:mwessendorf@gmail.com]On Behalf Of
Matthias Wessendorf
Sent: April 27, 2006 2:51 PM
To: MyFaces Discussion
Subject: Re: Help me understand component lifecycle please.


why not sharing in public?

On 4/27/06, Rhys Parry <rparry@infoterra.com> wrote:
> Ben,
>
> If you wouold like to take this off-line I can share my knowledge on the subject.  In
the end I created a bunch of aspects ( compile time aspectJ (although runtime would be preferable))
that should not be a problem to use.
>
> If you would like email me at rparry@infoterra.com
>
>
> Rhys Parry
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Neuman, Ben J., A&M IRM [mailto:bjneuman@hq.afis.osd.mil]
> Sent: April 27, 2006 2:43 PM
> To: 'MyFaces Discussion'
> Subject: RE: Help me understand component lifecycle please.
>
>
> Rhys, I think you hit the nail on the head. You can't get the component
> during the initial render response phase. The workarounds seem like an awful
> lot of work for my needs.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rhys Parry [mailto:rparry@Infoterra.com]
> Sent: Thursday, April 27, 2006 2:40 PM
> To: MyFaces Discussion
> Subject: RE: Help me understand component lifecycle please.
>
>
> All,
>
> I know I am joining this discussion late, however, I just went through the
> painful process of writing my own component library because I could not get
> the components during the render response phase.  My idea was that I should
> be able to get the component id and based on that do some additional
> security checking.  If it fails then set rendered = false.  It would be
> clean.  However. . . no go.
>
> >>However, it's also possible to configure it by using a binding
> >>attribute -- you bind the attribute to a backing bean, and then,
> >>depending on whether you use set or get, you can either modify the
> >>preconstructed component, or create your own version of the component
> >>yourself.
> Did that and it is more work than I had hoped.
>
> Also cluttering my code with
> <sometag value="..." isRendered="{bean.method}"/>
>
> and then
> class SomeBean
> {
>         public boolean isMethod()
>         {
>                 //do some boilerplate stuff
>         }
> }
>
> seems like a lot of replicated redundant code.
>
> A thought I had was that it would be nice if we could set up a
> JSFRenderCallbackHandler.  This object would be configured in the
> faces-config.xml file and would be called during the isRendered phase of the
> component lifecycle passing in the component as its arg. . . or the id(?).
> This would remove the boilerplate and not force developers to write a
> component library.  Also a JSFDisabledCallbackHandler would be nice.
>
> My 2 cents,
>
> Rhys
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Neuman, Ben J., A&M IRM [mailto:bjneuman@hq.afis.osd.mil]
> Sent: April 27, 2006 2:15 PM
> To: 'MyFaces Discussion'
> Subject: RE: Help me understand component lilfecycle please.
>
>
> Not sure I understand. Are you referring to the binding of a component's
> attribute to a backing bean? Or the binding of the component itself to a
> backing bean?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike Kienenberger [mailto:mkienenb@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, April 27, 2006 12:24 PM
> To: MyFaces Discussion
> Subject: Re: Help me understand component lilfecycle please.
>
>
> On 4/27/06, Neuman, Ben J., A&M IRM <bjneuman@hq.afis.osd.mil> wrote:
> > Got it. It makes sense to me to "disregard" unrendered components during
> > phase-processing code. I guess I have issues with the inability to modify
> > components before the initial rendering. Still feel this is a spec
> weakness.
>
> Well, you "configure" a component by specifying attributes.
>
> However, it's also possible to configure it by using a binding
> attribute -- you bind the attribute to a backing bean, and then,
> depending on whether you use set or get, you can either modify the
> preconstructed component, or create your own version of the component
> yourself.
>
> Sorry I didn't point this out earlier as this might be what you wanted.
>


--
Matthias Wessendorf
Aechterhoek 18
48282 Emsdetten
http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com

Mime
View raw message