sounds good.
On Jan 22, 2008 2:38 PM, Simon Lessard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ok I see your issue now... Hmmm... I would prefer the names beforeEncode and
> afterEncode then.
>
>
>
> On Jan 22, 2008 5:36 PM, Andrew Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED] >
> wrote:
> > Usually I would completely agree, but in this case it may be valid. The
> encodeEnd/Begin methods that don't use the FacesBean are setup in such a way
> to use either encodeAll or encodeEnd (with the FacesBean). So I really don't
> think people should be extending these methods.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Jan 22, 2008 3:27 PM, Martin Marinschek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > what is the reason of having encodeEnd and encodeBegin final?
> > >
> > > I have never understood why Trinidad is trying to hide possibilities
> from the developer. Isn't it safe enough to say that renderers are not part
> of the API, what you are doing there, might break with an update. Instead,
> everyone is forced by this into "compliance mode"... how strange.
> > >
> > > regards,
> > >
> > > Martin
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Jan 22, 2008 10:24 PM, Andrew Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > In the development of a library based on Trinidad, I need to have some
> hooks in the renderer to improve performance. Specifically, I need to setup
> a context and strip down a context for a component. Right now,
> CoreRenderer.encodeEnd (FacesContext, UIComponent) is final, so I cannot
> extend that method and the methods it calls I cannot reliably use (see
> below).
> > > >
> > > > What I propose is:
> > > >
> > > > new methods on CoreRenderer:
> > > > protected void startComponent(FacesContext context, RenderingContext
> context, UIComponent component, FacesBean bean) {}
> > > > protected void endComponent(FacesContext context, RenderingContext
> context, UIComponent component, FacesBean bean) {}
> > > >
> > > > These methods would be invoked from within
> "CoreRenderer.encodeBegin(FacesContext, UIComponent)" and "
> CoreRenderer.encodeEnd(FacesContext, UIComponent)" respectively.
> > > >
> > > > The benefit is that someone creating a component framework on top or
> Trinidad can extend the ability to setup and tear down settings when a
> component is being rendered. In my case, I need to extend the skinning code
> in a framework to enable certain functionality on a per-component basis from
> within the skin and have this functionality global to all our renderers.
> > > >
> > > > You may ask "why not just extend encodeAll?". Well the problem is that
> I have no idea when the child class will call this. For example:
> > > >
> > > > protected void encodeAll(FacesContext context, RenderingContext arc,
> UIComponent component, FacesBean bean) throws IOException
> > > > {
> > > > ... code
> > > > super.encodeAll(context, arc, component, bean);
> > > > ... code
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > As you can see, encodeAll doesn't give me the ability to have a hook
> from the renderer class level for when the component starts and ends. It
> doesn't make good OO code to have to manually code it in every one of our
> renderers.
> > > >
> > > > I also see the reason in having the methods final, so would prefer the
> hooks over removing the final keywords from encodeBegin and encodeEnd.
> > > >
> > > > Any objections to adding these 2 methods/hooks?
> > > >
> > > > If ppl. don't mind to respond quickly, I'll make the change if I get
> some quick positive feedback and no negative feedback. This is a fairly high
> priority feature that I need this for and cannot afford the 3 day vote
> period.
> > > >
> > > > Thank you,
> > > > Andrew
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > http://www.irian.at
> > >
> > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > Courses in English and German
> > >
> > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> >
> >
>
>
--
Matthias Wessendorf
further stuff:
blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org
