Frank W. Zammetti wrote:
I've been historically pretty anti-JSF, so I hope this means something
in light of that history: this is *very* interesting and I
congratulate you on making it happen! I've had the same "I think it
can be done" thoughts about mixing the two, just never actually did
anything with the idea, so I'm happy that someone has, if for no other
reason than to prove it can be done. Kudos!
The one concern I have initially is about performance... as you
describe, running through all the normal interceptors, and *then*
going through the JSF phases, sounds like an awful lot of code to
execute per request. I wonder about how well this will scale. Time
will tell of course, but that is my one concern.
This is why I left the JSF stack with just JSF phase interceptors and
not including the whole default stack. This lets you mix and match at
the action level, so if the action wanted the full action 2 stack plus
JSF, it can, or it can just use the JSF phase interceptors. The full
stack, or at least the params interceptor, is useful so that a page can
accept an "id" parameter, then look up the data to be available in the
JSF page later. In Action 2, nothing is forced an you, making it very
easy to override or set other defaults as needed.
Don
Good work in any case Don, I look forward to seeing this polished!
Frank
Don Brown wrote:
Jason Carreira wrote:
Great work Don! This is very cool. I've been saying we could do this
for a long time, but it's good to know I wasn't just making that up :-)
Heh, I know. After bragging about it after many beers at JavaOne, I
figured it was time to put up or shut up :)
I think it's interesting to think of the JSF lifecycle as a
particular profile of our interceptor lifecycle. Similarly, the
Portlet support is a different profile. For simple pages, you can
choose a simple profile.
Exactly. SAF2 makes a great controller.
Don, does this make SAF a full JSF implementation (minus the bundled
components)?
No, this requires a JSF implementation. For the example in showcase,
I used MyFaces. The integration code, however, doesn't require any
particular JSF implementation. If we were a full implementation,
there would be a ton more code; not something I think we'd be
interested in maintaining :)
Don
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted via Jive Forums
http://forums.opensymphony.com/thread.jspa?threadID=31659&messageID=61356#61356
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
